Pudgalas, Trainings, and Awakening Topics

II. The Second Yogasthāna

[Covering] the going to dispassion by the worldly [path] and likewise by the supramundane [path], and their requisite-stage, called renunciation.

Here, how many persons are there in this renunciation-stage [who are] taught, proclaimed [as those who] go forth [for these paths]?

And how is the delineation of persons [made]?

• What is the object [ālambana]?
• What is the instruction?
• What is the training?
• What are the dharmas conducive to training?
• What is the loss of yoga?
• What are the yogas [i.e., the four yoga-practices]?
• What is mental engagement [manaskāra]?
• How many practitioners of yoga [are there]?
• What is to be done for yoga?
• What is yoga-cultivation?
• What is the fruit of cultivation?
• How many person-designations [are there]?
• How many māras [are there]?
• How many māra-actions [are there]?
• How does an undertaking become fruitless?

There are twenty-eight persons.

Which twenty-eight?

Namely: [1] one of mild faculty, [2] one of sharp faculty, [3] one intoxicated with lust, [4] one intoxicated with hatred, [5] one intoxicated with delusion, [6] one intoxicated with conceit, [7] one intoxicated with applied thought [vitarka], [8] the balanced person [samaprāpta], [9] one of slight-dust nature [mandarajaska], [10] the practitioner [pratipannaka], [11] the fruit-attainer [phalastha], [12] the faith-follower [śraddhānusārin], [13] the dharma-follower [dharmānusārin], [14] the faith-resolved one [śraddhādhimukta], [15] the view-attainer [dṛṣṭiprāpta], [16] the body-witness [kāyasākṣin], [17] the one-birth-at-most [sakṛd-bhava-parama], [18] the family-to-family one [kulaṅkula], [19] the one-interval one [ekavīcika], [20] one [attaining] final-nirvāṇa-in-between [antarāparinirvāyin], [21] one [attaining] final-nirvāṇa-on-rebirth [upapadyaparinirvāyin], [22] one [attaining] final-nirvāṇa-with-effort [sābhisaṁskāra-parinirvāyin], [23] one [attaining] final-nirvāṇa-without-effort [anabhisaṁskāra-parinirvāyin], [24] the upstream-goer [ūrdhvasrotas], [25] the sometimes-liberated one [samaya-vimukta], [26] one of unshakable dharma [akopya-dharman], [27] the wisdom-liberated one [prajñā-vimukta], and [28] the both-ways-liberated one [ubhayatobhāga-vimukta].

What is the person of mild faculty?

The person whose faculties are mild, slow-functioning, weak-functioning, in [their relation to] the knowable as object, [as detailed] above [in sbh1.1:13]. He is again to be understood as twofold: [one mild] from the beginning [by virtue of] mild-faculty lineage, and [one mild because his] faculties [are] not-yet-cultivated.

What is the person of sharp faculty?

The person whose faculties are not slow-functioning, not weak-functioning, in [their relation to] the knowable as object, [as detailed] above. He again is to be understood as twofold: [one sharp] from the beginning [by virtue of] sharp-faculty lineage, and [one sharp because his] faculties [are] cultivated.

What is the lust-intoxicated person?

The person by whom, in previous other births, lust was resorted to, cultivated, [and] made much of — he, by that cause, by that condition, now has intense lust and prolonged lust toward a lust-arousing object. This is called the lust-intoxicated person.

What is the hatred-intoxicated person?

The person by whom, in previous other births, hatred was resorted to, cultivated, [and] made much of — by that cause, by that condition, [he] now has intense hatred and prolonged hatred toward a hateful object. This is called the hatred-intoxicated person.

What is the delusion-intoxicated person?

The person by whom, in previous other births, delusion was resorted to, cultivated, [and] made much of — by that cause, by that condition, [he] now has intense delusion and prolonged delusion toward an object of delusion. This is called the delusion-intoxicated person.

What is the conceit-intoxicated person?

The person by whom, in previous other births, conceit was resorted to, cultivated, [and] made much of — by that cause, by that condition, [he] now has intense conceit and prolonged conceit toward a conceit-arousing object.

This is called the conceit-intoxicated person.

What is the applied-thought-intoxicated person?

The person by whom, in previous other births, applied thought was resorted to, cultivated, [and] made much of — by that cause, by that condition, [he] now has intense applied-thought and prolonged applied-thought toward an object that is the place of applied thought. This is called the applied-thought-intoxicated person.

What is the balanced person [samaprāpta]?

The person by whom, in previous other births, lust, hatred, delusion, conceit, [and] applied-thought were not resorted to, cultivated, [or] made much of, and [for whom] these dharmas were not seen as dangerous, [not] disparaged, [not] censured — he, by that cause, by that condition, in a lust-arousing or hate-arousing or conceit-arousing or applied-thought-arousing object, does not have intense lust, nor prolonged lust, and lust does not become manifest in him from that object. As with lust, so with hatred, delusion, conceit, [and] applied-thought. This is called the balanced person.

What is the slight-dust person [mandarajaska]?

The person by whom, in previous other births, lust was not resorted to, [not] made much of, and [who] has often seen it as dangerous, disparaged, censured — he, by that cause, by that condition, now [only] toward a lust-arousing object [that is] present, manifest, strong, abundant, [and] glaring, produces lust [matching] that [great] lust[-arousing thing]; toward a middle or small one, he does not produce [it]. As with lust, so with hatred, delusion, conceit, [and] applied-thought are to be understood. This is called the slight-dust person.

What is the practitioner person?

Answer: there are four practitioner persons, namely: the practitioner for the fruit of stream-entry, the practitioner for the fruit of once-returning, the practitioner for the fruit of non-returning, [and] the practitioner for the fruit of arhatship. This is called the practitioner person.

What is the fruit-attainer person?

Answer: the stream-enterer, the once-returner, the non-returner, [and] the arhat. This is called the fruit-attainer person.

What is the faith-follower person?

The person who seeks admonition-and-instruction from another and by its force practices, namely, for the attainment of the [path-]fruit, [because] in the dharmas as grasped, as mastered, reflected on, weighed, [and] examined, he is not himself capable, [not] fit, to follow those dharmas by way of cultivation. Not otherwise than by [following] the wisdom of [another] person does he practice — therefore he is called faith-follower.

What is the dharma-follower person?

The person who, in the dharmas as heard, mastered, reflected on, weighed, [and] examined, is himself capable, fit to follow those dharmas by way of cultivation, [and] does not seek admonition-and-instruction from another, namely, for the attainment of the [path-]fruit — this is called the dharma-follower person.

What is the faith-resolved person [śraddhādhimukta]?

That faith-follower person, at the moment when he attains the recluse-state [śrāmaṇya, i.e. the path-fruit], touches it, [and] realizes it by the path of admonition-and-instruction from another — at that moment he is called faith-resolved.

What is the view-attainer person [dṛṣṭiprāpta]?

Answer: that very dharma-follower person, at the moment when he attains the recluse-fruit, touches it, [and] realizes it [Damaged/Conjectural]: not by the path of admonition-and-instruction from another — at that moment he is called view-attainer.

What is the body-witness person?

This person attains the eight liberations [vimokṣa] in forward and reverse order, and rises out [of them], and, having realized [them] with the body, dwells much [therein], but does not entirely attain the destruction of the fluxes — this is called the body-witness person.

What is the seven-times-at-most person [saptakṛtvaḥ-parama]?

This person, by the abandonment of the three fetters — personality-view [satkāya-dṛṣṭi], clinging-to-virtue-and-vow [śīlavrata-parāmarśa], [and] doubt [vicikitsā] — becomes a stream-enterer, of non-falling nature, certain, bound for awakening. [As] one whose maximum is seven times, [after] seven times transmigrating among the gods and humans, he makes an end of suffering. Both stream-enterer persons [the seven-times-at-most and the family-to-family] are to be understood [so].

Now, what is the one-interval person [ekavīcika]?

For this practitioner of the once-returner [and] non-returner fruit, the strong and middle realm-of-desire defilements are abandoned, [and] only the soft [defilements] remain; and, having produced only one realm-of-desire existence, there itself he attains final nirvāṇa. He once returns to this [world] — this is called the one-interval [one].

What is the final-nirvāṇa-in-between person [antarāparinirvāyin]?

Answer: [there are] three [kinds of] final-nirvāṇa-in-between persons. The first in-between-nirvāṇa person: just upon decease, at the time of intermediate-existence-generation, [he] generates the intermediate existence and at the very moment of generation attains final nirvāṇa — like a small spark of fire, which, when arisen, is at once extinguished. The second in-between-nirvāṇa person: having generated the intermediate existence, [and] standing there some time after the generation, after some time attains final nirvāṇa — [the time being such that] the rebirth-existence is not [yet reached and] is on his account ceased — like an iron-spark from a heated iron-pot struck by an iron-hammer, [which] flies out — thus he attains final nirvāṇa. The third in-between-nirvāṇa person: having generated the intermediate existence, he approaches [the place] where the rebirth-existence [will be], and, having approached, [but] not yet reborn, attains final nirvāṇa — like an iron-spark that has flown out [and], before falling on the earth, [is extinguished] — [thus] he attains final nirvāṇa. These three intermediate-existence-nirvāṇa persons, gathered into one, are called the in-between-nirvāṇa person.

What is the upon-rebirth-nirvāṇa person [upapadya-parinirvāyin]?

He who, just upon being reborn, attains final nirvāṇa.

What is the without-effort-nirvāṇa person [an-abhisaṁskāra-parinirvāyin]?

He who, without effort, without exertion, without exhaustion, bringing the path into presence and [thereby] being reborn there, attains final nirvāṇa — this is called the without-effort-nirvāṇa person.

What is the with-effort-nirvāṇa person [sābhisaṁskāra-parinirvāyin]?

He who, with effort, with exertion, with exhaustion, bringing the path into presence and [thereby] being reborn there, attains final nirvāṇa — this is called the with-effort-nirvāṇa person.

What is the upstream-goer person [ūrdhvasrotas]?

The person who is a non-returner, [and] who, reborn in the first dhyāna, does not attain final nirvāṇa there itself, but, having passed away from there, by progressively higher rebirth, goes up to the Akaniṣṭha gods, or [up to] the neither-perception- nor-non-perception sphere. This is called the upstream-goer person.

What is the sometimes-liberated person [samaya-vimukta]?

The mild-faculty-lineage person who [from time to time] falls back from the worldly seen-dharma pleasure-dwellings [dṛṣṭa-dharma-sukha-vihāra], or considers [taking his own] death [to safeguard his liberation], or protects [his] liberation, [having] fallen into intense fear of heedlessness; namely, taking that very [tendency to] falling-back as predominant, [only] that much is his wholesome side, and, through the passing of those nights and days, moments, instants, [and] hours, he does not greatly proceed to distinction, so long as he does not make intense effort. This is called the sometimes-liberated person.

What is the unshakable-dharma person [akopya-dharman]?

By the reverse of [the above], the unshakable-dharma person is to be understood.

What is the wisdom-liberated person [prajñā-vimukta]?

The person who entirely attains the destruction of the fluxes, but does not dwell, having attained, realizing the eight liberations with the body. This is called the wisdom-liberated person.

What is the both-ways-liberated person [ubhayato-bhāga-vimukta]?

The person who entirely attains the destruction of the fluxes [and] dwells having attained the eight liberations with the body. His mind is liberated from defilement-obscuration [kleśa-āvaraṇa] and from liberation-obscuration [vimokṣa-āvaraṇa] — this is called the both-ways-liberated person.

What is the delineation of persons?

The delineation of persons is to be understood by eleven divisions. By which eleven? Namely: by division of faculty, by division of community [nikāya], by division of conduct, by division of vow, [by division of practice,] by division of path-fruit, by division of application, by division of attainment, by division of rebirth, by division of falling-back, [and] by division of obscuration.

By division of faculty, [there is] the delineation of mild-faculty and sharp-faculty persons.

By division of community [nikāya], the delineation of seven kinds of person: monk, nun, female probationer, male novice, female novice, layman, laywoman.

Now, by division of conduct, the delineation of seven persons: he who is the lust-intoxicated person is lust-conducted; he who is hatred-intoxicated is hatred-conducted; he who is delusion-intoxicated is delusion-conducted; he who is conceit-intoxicated is conceit-conducted; he who is applied-thought-intoxicated is applied-thought-conducted; the balanced person [samaprāpta] is even-balanced in conduct; the slight-dust person [mandarajaska] is slight in conduct — [thus they are] to be understood.

Now, what are the marks of the lust-conducted person?

Here the lust-conducted person, [even] toward a slight, wholly inferior lust-arousing object, produces a dense, strong lust-obsession — what more toward a middle or fine [object]? And that lust-obsession he maintains in continuity for a long time, [remains] bound [by it] for a long time. Through that obsession, he is overcome by lust-arousing dharmas, but he is not able to overcome the lust-arousing dharmas. He is of smooth faculties, of non-harsh faculties, not of harsh faculties, not of cut-off faculties; not too much harming others — namely by body or by speech; [yet he is] hard to instruct, hard to admonish; of inferior conviction; of firm bodily action, of stable bodily action; of firm vow, of stable vow; having large requirements for requisites and provisions, greedy by nature, giving great weight to them; full of joy, full of delight, free from frowning, of open-faced complexion, accompanied by a smile.

What are the marks of the hatred-conducted person?

Here the hatred-conducted person, toward a hateful object, [even] by a slight resistance-cause-sign, produces a dense, abundant resistance-obsession — what more by a middle or strong [one]? And that resistance-obsession he maintains in continuity for a long time, [remains] bound [by it] for a long time. Through resistance-obsession, he is overcome by hateful dharmas, but cannot overcome the hateful dharmas. He is of rough faculties, of harsh faculties, of cut-off faculties, of fierce faculties, and is excessively harming others by nature — namely by body and by speech. Yet he is easy to advise, easy to admonish; [but] he is clamorous, talkative, brazen, of much non-conviction; not of firm action, not of stable action; not of firm vow, not of stable vow; full of dejection, full of distress; impatient, not great-minded; of perverse nature; one who takes things the wrong way, hard to bring around, full of grudges; of cruel hopes, fierce, taking offense, replying word-for-word — even when slightly addressed, he is offended, becomes angry, afflicted; sullen, [he] stands [thus], generates anger; of frown-marked face, of non-open face, hating others’ fortune, full of envy. — Such kinds of marks of the hatred-conducted person are to be understood.

Now, what are the marks of the delusion-conducted person?

Here the delusion-conducted person, [even] toward a slight delusion-arousing object, produces a dense, abundant delusion-obsession — [and] still more toward a middle or strong [object]; and he maintains the continuity of that delusion-obsession for a long time, and is bound by it. He is overcome by delusion-arousing dharmas, but cannot overcome the delusion-arousing dharmas. He is of slow faculties, of dull faculties, of intoxicated faculties, of loose bodily action; an ill-thought-thinker, ill-speech-speaker, ill-deed-doer; lazy, not endowed with [the capacity for] rising; of limited capacity, dull-witted; of lost mindfulness; not dwelling with full awareness; a wrong-grasper, hard to advise, hard to admonish, of inferior conviction; born deaf-mute [or] hand-impaired, unfit to understand the meaning of well-spoken and ill-spoken [teachings], and of other-following nature, other-led, other-guided. — Such kinds of marks of the delusion-conducted person are to be understood.

Now, what are the marks of the conceit-conducted person?

Here the conceit-conducted person, [even] toward a slight conceit-arousing object, produces a dense conceit-obsession — what more toward a middle or strong [one]? And the continuity of that conceit-obsession he maintains for a long time, and is bound [by it].

[Repeating:] What are the marks of the conceit-conducted person?

Here the conceit-conducted person, [even] toward a slight conceit-arousing object, produces a dense conceit-obsession — what more toward a middle or strong [one]?

The continuity of that conceit-obsession he maintains for a long time, and is bound by it; he is overcome by conceit-place dharmas, but cannot overcome the conceit-place dharmas. He is of restless faculties, of arrogant faculties, of high faculties; engaged in adorning the body, he speaks an excessively haughty speech, not lowered [in tone]; and toward those who should be respected — those suffering, the gurus, persons occupying the place of guru — from time to time he is not a doer of the proper respect. He is stiff, of non-humble body, not respectful in salutation, bowing, [or] rising; not skilled in the proper service; self-grasping, self-exalting, other-deprecating; desirous of gain, desirous of honor, desirous of fame, voice, [and] eulogy; of arrogant-faced visage, hard-to-be-penetrated, hard to advise, of grand conviction, of weak compassion, and full of strong views of self, being, soul, person, [and] individual, with anger, full of grudges. — Now, what are the marks of the applied-thought-conducted person? Here the applied-thought-conducted person, [even] toward a slight applied-thought-place object, produces a dense obsession, and that obsession he maintains for a long time, and is bound [by it]. He is overcome by applied-thought-place dharmas, but cannot overcome the applied-thought-place dharmas. He is of unstable faculties, of fickle faculties, of restless faculties, of distracted faculties; of unstable bodily action, of corrupt verbal action; hard to instruct, hard to admonish; fond of [conceptual] proliferation [prapañca], delighting in proliferation; full of doubt, full of indecision; and of varied desire, of unstable vow, of undetermined vow; of unstable action, of undetermined action; full of suspicion, of lost mindfulness; non-delighting in seclusion, full of distraction; following desire-and-lust in worldly variety; [though sometimes] skilful, [yet] non-lazy [only in distractions]. — Such kinds of marks of the applied-thought-conducted person are to be understood.

This is the delineation of persons by division of conduct, [thus] to be understood.

Now, the delineation of persons by division of vow [praṇidhāna]: there is a person who has made his vow in the disciple-vehicle, there is one in the solitary-buddha-vehicle, [and] there is one in the great vehicle. Now, this person who has made his vow in the disciple-vehicle may be of disciple-lineage, may be of solitary-buddha-lineage, [or] may be of great-vehicle-lineage. [Likewise,] this person who has made his vow in [the path of] solitary awakening may also be of solitary-buddha-lineage, of disciple-lineage, [or] of great-vehicle-lineage. [And] this person who has made his vow in the great vehicle may also be of disciple-lineage, may be of solitary-buddha-lineage, [or] may be of great-vehicle-lineage. [Now,] this disciple-lineage person who has made his vow in solitary awakening or in supreme perfect awakening — he, on account of his disciple-lineage, necessarily at the final time will turn back that vow and stand only in the disciple-vehicle vow. Thus the solitary-buddha-lineage and great-vehicle-lineage [persons] are to be understood. There is, for these persons, a requisite of vow [and] a transmission of vow [from one life to the next], but not a requisite of lineage [or] a transmission of lineage. In this [śrāvakabhūmi] context, these persons are to be understood as of disciple-vehicle vow and of disciple-lineage.

Thus is the delineation of persons by division of vow.

How is the delineation of persons by division of practice [pratipatti]?

Of these persons just pointed out [and] proclaimed, [their] going forth is by four practices.

By which four?

There is the painful practice with slow knowledge [duḥkhā pratipad dhandhābhijñā]; there is the painful practice with quick knowledge [duḥkhā pratipad kṣiprābhijñā]; there is the pleasant practice with slow knowledge [sukhā pratipad dhandhābhijñā]; [and] there is the pleasant practice with quick knowledge [sukhā pratipad kṣiprābhijñā].

[Damaged/Conjectural]: Of the mild-faculty person, [who is] a gainer of [only the] preliminary dhyāna [anāgamya], the practice is called painful, with slow knowledge. [Damaged/Conjectural]: Of the sharp-faculty person, [who is] a gainer of [only the] preliminary dhyāna, the practice is called painful, with quick knowledge. Of the mild-faculty person, [who is] a gainer of the [full] basic dhyāna [maula-dhyāna], the practice is called pleasant, with slow knowledge. Of the sharp-faculty person, [who is] a gainer of the [full] basic dhyāna, the practice is called pleasant, with quick knowledge. Thus the delineation of persons by division of practice is to be understood.

Now, how is the delineation of persons by division of path-fruit to be understood?

Namely, of the four practitioners — practitioner for the fruit of stream-entry, of once-returning, of non-returning, [and] of arhatship — and of the four fruit-attainers — stream-enterer, once-returner, non-returner, [and] arhat — and of those for whom the practitioner-paths [still] proceed: they are practitioners; their delineation is by the practitioner-path. [Those] established in the arhat-fruit [and the lesser] recluse-fruits — their delineation is the path-fruit delineation. Thus is the delineation of persons by division of path-fruit.

How is the delineation of persons by division of application?

Namely, by [the categories of] faith-follower and dharma-follower. The person who is applied [to the path] by faith-following is the faith-follower; [Damaged/Conjectural]: the one applied to the dharmas by following a discipline not dependent on another’s condition is the dharma-follower. Thus is the delineation of persons by division of application.

Now, how is the delineation of persons by division of attainment [samāpatti]?

Namely, of the body-witness: the witness, having realized the eight liberations with the body, dwells having attained [them], and does not entirely attain the destruction of the fluxes. [Being] formed [himself], he sees forms [first vimokṣa]. Inwardly with non-form perception, [yet] externally he sees forms [second vimokṣa]. He realizes the pure liberation with the body and dwells having attained [third vimokṣa]. The sphere of infinity of space, infinity of consciousness, nothingness, neither-perception-nor-non-perception, [and] the cessation of perception-and-feeling [fourth through eighth vimokṣa], in forward and reverse order he attains and rises out [of]. Thus is the delineation of persons by division of attainment.

How is the delineation of persons by division of rebirth?

Namely, [the delineation] of the seven-times-at-most, of the family-to-family, of the one-interval, of the in-between-nirvāṇa, of the upon-rebirth-nirvāṇa, [and] of the upstream-goer. Thus is the delineation of persons by division of rebirth.

How is the delineation of persons by division of falling-back?

Namely, of the sometimes-liberated arhat, who is liable to falling back from the seen-dharma pleasure-dwellings, the delineation [is made] by the division of falling-back, [and conversely for the unshakable]; of the unshakable-dharma arhat, who is not liable to falling back from the seen-dharma pleasure-dwellings, [the delineation is made by the division of non-falling-back]. Thus is the delineation of persons by division of falling-back.

Now, how is the delineation of persons by division of obscuration [āvaraṇa]?

Namely, of the wisdom-liberated and both-ways-liberated arhats. The wisdom-liberated arhat is liberated from the defilement-obscuration, [but] not from the attainment-obscuration [samāpatti-āvaraṇa]; the both-ways-liberated, however, the arhat, is liberated from the defilement-obscuration and from the attainment-obscuration — therefore he is called both-ways-liberated. Thus is the delineation of persons by division of obscuration. — By these [eleven] divisions just pointed out, the delineation of the persons just pointed out is, in order, to be understood.

What is the object that purifies defilements?

Answer: The grossness of the lower stages [is what makes them objects to be transcended]: the realm of desire [is gross] relative to the first dhyāna, and so on up through the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception.

What, in this context, is grossness?

Grossness is of two kinds: grossness in essential nature [svabhāva-audārika], and grossness in number/quantity [saṁkhyā-audārika]. As for grossness in essential nature: in the realm of desire the five aggregates are [also] present, but relative to the first dhyāna, those that pertain to the realm of desire are more flawed and more painful in their abiding, and shorter-lasting, and inferior, and more rejected. This is their grossness in essential nature relative to the first dhyāna; and for that reason the upper stages are said to be more peaceful, more sublime.

What is grossness in quantity?

The form-aggregate pertaining to the realm of desire is to be known as far more extensive [than the form-aggregate of the upper stages], to-be-abandoned [in greater quantity]; and likewise up to the consciousness-aggregate. This is called grossness in quantity.

Likewise in the upper stages, grossness in essential nature and grossness in quantity are to be understood as appropriate to each case. But in the upper stages, [going] up to the sphere of nothingness, all the lower stages should be understood as more gross relative to those above, more painful in abiding, and shorter-lasting; the sphere of neither-perception-nor-non-perception is simply peaceful, since there is no stage above it that is more excellent. Here the meaning of disadvantage, in brief, is the meaning of grossness: whichever stage has greater disadvantage, that, in respect of disadvantage, is called gross; [and] the stage on which, for worldlings, there is less disadvantage is called, in respect of disadvantage, peaceful. This is the object for the worldly path that purifies the defilements: he sees the lower stage as having disadvantage, as disease, as without security, and the upper stage as peaceful. [Thus] the defilements of the lower stages, [going] up through the sphere of nothingness, beginning with the realm of desire, are abandoned, but not abandoned absolutely; they are subject to re-arising. By the supramundane path, on the other hand, the object for the purification of defilements is fourfold, namely: the truth of suffering, the truth of origin, the truth of cessation, and the truth of the path.

Now, what is the truth of suffering?

Namely: birth is suffering, aging too is suffering, illness [is suffering], death [is suffering], union with the unloved [is suffering], separation from the loved [is suffering], and frustration of desire [is suffering] — in short, the five aggregates of clinging are suffering. The noble truth of origin is craving — productive of further existence, bound up with delight and lust, taking delight here and there.

The noble truth of cessation is the complete abandonment of that very craving.

The truth of the path is the noble eightfold path. The fourfold delineation of [these] truths is made by reference to the dark side and the bright side, by the structure of cause and effect: the truth of suffering is the effect, the truth of origin is the cause [on the dark side]; the truth of cessation is the effect, the truth of the path is the cause [on the bright side] — for the attainment, for the direct touching [of cessation]. The truth of suffering is like the illness: it is to be fully known first. The truth of origin is like the cause of the illness: it is to be discarded next. The truth of cessation is like health: it is to be touched, to be reached, to be realized directly. The truth of the path is like the medicine: it is to be resorted to, to be cultivated, to be made much of. And [each] is real, just so, not otherwise, not contradicted, not perverted: suffering by way of being suffering, [and so on] up to the path by way of being the path — therefore [each] is called a truth. And its specific characteristic does not deceive, and from seeing it unperverted cognitions arise. For that reason it is called truth.

Why, again, are these truths only of the noble ones [ārya]?

The noble ones see them [as they are]; they know them as truths, see them as they truly are. The foolish, on the other hand, do not know, [do not] see [them] as they truly are. Therefore they are called noble truths. For the foolish, the fact that these are truths is not, in the nature of things, known [for what it is]. For the noble ones, on the other hand, [it is known] in both ways — therein both knowing and being-known [are present]. [Now,] for one to whom [a state] presents itself as ‘suffering,’ [a state] of painful feeling arises — bodily and mental; but birth itself is not the [feeling of] suffering — it is the cause of suffering; and [so on] up to: frustration of desire is [cause of] suffering.

Suffering arises caused by frustration of desire, [suffering both] bodily and mental; but the frustration of desire itself is not the [felt] suffering — it is rather the cause of suffering, and [the same holds] for the rest. In brief, [as the formula] ‘the five aggregates of clinging are suffering’ [shows] — by these synonyms beginning with birth, the suffering-of-suffering [duḥkha-duḥkhatā] alone is elucidated; the suffering of change [vipariṇāma-duḥkhatā] and the suffering of conditioning [saṁskāra-duḥkhatā] remain unstated [in this short formula]. But these too are elucidated by the suffering-character of the five aggregates, for the five aggregates of clinging are pervaded by the three feelings, and are the vessel of the suffering-of-suffering just described, and [also of] the suffering of change, not [explicitly] stated, and [of] the suffering of conditioning — these too are to be seen in just these aggregates. For what reason, then, did the Blessed One proclaim the suffering-of-suffering alone by its own term, but the suffering of change and the suffering of conditioning [only] by synonym? Because regarding the suffering-of-suffering, for the noble ones and the foolish alike, the cognition of suffering arises equally. On account of [this] sobering quality, the suffering-of-suffering is stated [explicitly]; and for those without prior insight, when so taught, easy entry into the [other] truths is achieved among those who are trainable.

How, then, is the threefold suffering delineated?

Now, what was said — ‘suffering is birth, [and so on] through to frustration of desire is suffering’ — by this the painful feeling with its basis is declared.

And that is the suffering-of-suffering. This is the delineation of the suffering-of-suffering. [Now] those dharmas which are its opposite — namely youth [as opposed] to aging, health to illness, life to death, union with the loved to union with the unloved, separation from the unloved [as opposed] to separation from the loved, [and] gratification of desire to its frustration — and the defilements [together] with their basis that proceed in painful feeling, and the defilements that proceed in dharmas associated with pleasure (such as health, etc.), and the feeling that arises from these — this is called the suffering of change.

A pleasant feeling with its basis, [being] impermanent, undergoes change, [and] because becoming otherwise predominates, it produces suffering. The defilements, again, wherever they arise, by the very fact of being obsessive enwrappings are painful, and this is [the] changed-state of mind. Hence it is called the suffering of change.

As was said by the Blessed One: ‘With a mind fallen [into change] and changed [from its prior pleasant state], [Damaged/Conjectural: taking a woman by the hand] […]’ — and so on at length.

And as was said: ‘Gripped by the obsessive desire of sense-lust and conditioned by that sense-desire obsession, he experiences mental pain and dejection born thereof.’ Likewise [for one] gripped by ill-will, sloth-and-torpor, restlessness-and-regret, [and] doubt. Hence, by this scriptural tradition, supremely attested, the suffering-character is found in defilements, and so is the change-character. Therefore one speaks of defilement-as-change-suffering. This is the delineation of the suffering of change. The suffering of conditioning, again, is all-pervasive in the aggregates of clinging: setting aside the noble suffering-of-suffering already described, and the change-quality subsumed under defilement, and the pleasant feeling-with-basis, all the remaining [aspects of the] painful aggregates — accompanied by suffering, born from it, conditioned by its arising, and vessels of its continued existence once arisen — this is called the suffering of conditioning.

The aggregates [are] impermanent, marked by arising and vanishing, accompanied by clinging, attached to the three feelings, afflicted by encumbrance [dauṣṭhulya], fallen into insecurity, not yet released, and not autonomous in the face of the suffering-of-suffering and the suffering of change — this is what is called the suffering-state called the suffering of conditioning. This is the delineation of the suffering of conditioning. Here ‘craving’ [tṛṣṇā], ‘longing,’ ‘yearning,’ [and] ‘delighting’ are synonyms. That yearning, again, proceeds along three avenues: yearning for further existence, and yearning for sense-objects [twofold, as below]. The yearning for further existence is the craving that is productive of re-becoming. Yearning for sense-objects is twofold: [a] with respect to sense-objects already attained, accompanied by joy and clinging to them; and [b] with respect to sense-objects not yet attained, accompanied by longing for union with them. Of these, the one with respect to objects attained, accompanied by joy and clinging, is what is called ‘accompanied by delight and lust.’ The one with respect to objects not yet attained, accompanied by longing for union, is what is called ‘delighting here and there.’ Cessation, too, is twofold: cessation of defilement [kleśa], and cessation of secondary defilement [upakleśa]. The path, too, is twofold: that of the trainee [śaikṣa] and that of the non-trainee [aśaikṣa]. This object for purification of defilements is to be understood as belonging to the supramundane path. Thus he speaks of a fourfold object: pervasive object [vyāpī-ālambana], conduct-purifying object [carita-viśodhana-ālambana], skill object [kauśalya-ālambana], and defilement-purifying object [kleśa-viśodhana-ālambana].

Now, what is instruction [avavāda]?

Fourfold instruction: unperverted instruction, graduated instruction, instruction from tradition, and instruction from direct realization.

What is unperverted instruction?

That by which one teaches Dharma and reality in an unperverted way, [and] brings the hearer to grasp it — [teaching what is] real, leading him out [of saṁsāra], for the right destruction of suffering, for the making of an end to suffering — this is called unperverted instruction.

What is graduated instruction?

When in due time one teaches the Dharma, [and] points out first of all the more accessible matters, has them learnt, has them recited, and afterwards the deep ones — first, for the realization of the first truth, one instructs concerning that, [and] afterwards concerning the truths of origin, cessation, and path; [or] for the attainment of the first dhyāna, one instructs first concerning that, [and] afterwards concerning the other dhyānas and attainments. This kind of instruction is to be known as graduated instruction. Instruction from tradition is what one has received from the side of teachers — from those who occupy the place of teacher, who know yoga: preceptors, instructors, [or even] the Tathāgata or a disciple of the Tathāgata — and [transmits], neither subtracting nor adding, instructing others. This is called instruction from tradition. Instruction from direct realization: [the case in which] one to whom these dharmas have become known, touched, contacted, [and] made manifest — having dwelt alone, secluded — [then,] for the attainment of [the same] by others, for their touching, for their making-manifest, instructs [them]. This is called instruction from direct realization. There is, moreover, a wholly complete instruction, of every aspect.

What is it?

That by which one instructs through the three wonders [prātihārya]: the wonder of psychic power, the wonder of mind-reading, and the wonder of admonition. By the wonder of psychic power, one displays manifold ranges of psychic power and so engenders respect [for oneself] in others, such that, born of respect, they become eager in the application of ear-attention and in mental engagement. Then, by the wonder of mind-reading, one investigates the operations of their mind; by the wonder of admonition, one teaches the Dharma to suit their faculties, their conduct, [and] their access [to teaching], and admonishes [them] by appropriate antidotes. Thereby this instruction, subsumed under the three wonders, is the complete instruction.

Now, what is training [śikṣā]?

Answer: the three trainings — training in higher virtue [adhiśīla], training in higher mind [adhicitta], [and] training in higher wisdom [adhiprajñā].

What is the training in higher virtue?

‘Just as he is one of such virtue, possessed of such virtue, he dwells…’ and so on in detail [as elaborated at sbh1.3:3] above.

The training in higher mind: secluded from sense-desires, secluded from unwholesome qualities, with applied and sustained thought, born of seclusion, accompanied by joy and pleasure, and with one-pointedness of mind — he enters and abides in the first dhyāna, [and so on] up to the fourth dhyāna. This is the training in higher mind. Moreover, all the formless attainments and other concentration-attainments are called training in higher mind. But it is by relying on the [four] dhyānas that one first descends into the realization of the truths, not entirely without the dhyānas. Therefore the dhyānas, taken as primary, are called the training in higher mind. The training in higher wisdom is the knowing of the four noble truths as they truly are.

For what reason are there just three trainings, no more?

Answer: for the sake of the establishment of concentration; for the sake of the support of knowledge; and for the sake of the doing of the task. [That is,] for the sake of establishing concentration, [there is] the training in higher virtue: training [in restraint], for, having been established in virtue, one touches the one-pointedness of mind, the concentration of mind.

For the sake of the support of knowledge, [there is] the training in higher mind. For when the mind is concentrated, one-pointed, knowing and seeing of the knowable as it truly is proceeds by mindfulness. For the doing of the task, [there is] the training in higher wisdom; for by perfectly purified knowing-and-seeing one directly realizes the abandonment of defilements. For this — namely, the abandonment of defilements — is one’s own supreme good. What more is to be done thereafter? — Now, what is the sequence of these trainings? In one of pure virtue there is no regret; in the regret-free, gladness; in gladness, joy; in joy, tranquillity; in tranquillity, pleasure; in the pleased, mental concentration. The concentrated mind knows things as they truly are, sees [them] as they truly are; knowing and seeing [them] as they truly are, one grows weary [of saṁsāra]; wearied, one becomes detached; detached, one is liberated; liberated, without clinging, one attains final nirvāṇa. Thus these trainings, when cultivated, lead one to the peak — namely, to nirvāṇa without clinging. This is the sequence of these trainings.

For what reason is the training in higher virtue called ‘higher virtue’?

Similarly higher mind [and] higher wisdom — [each is so called] both by reason of pre-eminence and by reason of having a higher referent. How [is it called so] by reason of having a higher referent? With higher mind as referent, virtue is the training in higher virtue. With higher wisdom as referent, mental concentration is the training in higher mind. With reference to abandoning defilement, that knowing-and-seeing is the training in higher wisdom. And whichever is the training in higher mind, and whichever is the training in higher wisdom — these trainings are unique to this teaching, not shared with what is outside it. Thus [they are called so] by reason of having a higher referent. There is also a training in higher mind that brings on the training in higher wisdom, and a training in higher wisdom that brings on the training in higher mind. For example: the noble disciple, not yet gaining the basic dhyānas, [as] a trainee, one who has [already] seen the [four noble] truths, afterwards engaging for the abandonment of defilements to be abandoned by cultivation, cultivates the awakening-factor of mindfulness [and the rest]. This is the training in higher wisdom that brings on the training in higher mind. The training in higher mind that brings on the training in higher wisdom was stated earlier.

Here: there is training in higher virtue without higher mind or higher wisdom; there is higher-virtue-with-higher-mind without higher wisdom; but there is no training in higher wisdom without both higher virtue and higher mind. Therefore where higher wisdom is [being] trained, there all three trainings are to be understood [as present].

This much is the delineation of the trainings. Here a yogin engaged in yoga should train. Three [kinds of] person attain the truths: which three? Namely, one [wholly] not free from lust, one largely free from lust, and one wholly free from lust. The one wholly not free from lust, attaining the truths, with the realization of the truths becomes a stream-enterer. The one largely free from lust becomes a once-returner. The one wholly free from lust, with the realization of the truths, becomes a non-returner. [There are] three faculties [associated with this]: the faculty ‘I shall come to know what is not yet known’ [anājñātam-ājñāsyāmi-indriya], the faculty of knowing [ājña-indriya], [and] the faculty of one who has known [ājñātāvī-indriya].

How is the delineation of these faculties made?

For one engaged in the realization of truths not yet realized, [there is] the delineation ‘I shall come to know the unknown.’ For the trainee who has [begun to] realize them, [there is] the delineation of the faculty of knowing. For the non-trainee, the arhat, whose task is done, [there is] the delineation of the faculty of one who has known. [There are] three doors of liberation [vimokṣa-mukha], namely: emptiness [śūnyatā], wishlessness [apraṇihita], [and] signlessness [animitta]. Of these three doors of liberation, both kinds of object — the conditioned and the unconditioned — are spoken of. But beyond [these two] — [the imputed] self, being, soul, person — that is unreal. Now, from seeing fault and disadvantage in the conditioned, no wish toward it arises; from this absence of wishing, the door of liberation of wishlessness is delineated. In nirvāṇa, on the other hand, for one whose aspiration is rightly directed, there is [the right kind of] wishing — seeing it as peaceful, as sublime, and as the way out [niḥsaraṇa]; and from this seeing-the-way-out, the door of liberation of signlessness is delineated. Now, with respect to what is unreal, there is no [coherent] wish whatsoever. Just as ‘unreal’ is unreal [in itself] — for one who knows and sees thus, the door of liberation of emptiness is delineated. Thus the delineation of the three doors of liberation is made.

Now, what are the dharmas conducive to training [śikṣānuloma-dharma]?

Answer: there are ten dharmas adverse to training, [and] as antidotes to them, ten dharmas conducive to training are to be understood. What are the dharmas adverse to training? Namely: [1] a woman — young, of stately complexion, captivating — for a son of good family engaged in training, an extreme obstacle, an enemy on the path; [2] in formations involved with the personality-view [satkāya-dṛṣṭi], restraining [him through] laziness [and] indolence; [3] connected with personality-view, lust for taste, dependent on edible food; [4] in manifold worldly tales of every kind, lustful inclination and clinging — [a] corruption of dharma-reflection and yogic mental engagement. What is that [ill-conduct]? Namely: with respect to tastes, or to the [noble] truths, or to the aggregates, or to the fruit of action — and, for one engaged in abandonment, when body-encumbrance is slackening, the ill-conduct of mental engagement in calm and insight; [5] or being overcome by sloth-and-torpor — [i.e.,] contraction of mind; [6] for one of aroused energy, bodily fatigue [and] mental distress; [7] for one of overly slack energy, failure to attain distinction, [and] the exhaustion of the wholesome side; [8] through greed, or fame, or praise, or simply some trivial pleasure of one sort or another — delight, joy, restlessness, lack of quieting, anxiety and agitated elation; [9] at [the prospect of] the cessation of personality, at [the prospect of] nirvāṇa, alarm, paralysis; [10a] application in immoderate measure, excessive talking, [and,] while speaking a Dharma-talk, taking up disputatious talk and pursuing it; [10b] in objects previously seen, heard, or experienced — manifold and of many kinds — scattering of mind, distraction of mind, and, in impermanent conditioned things, brooding fixation. — These are the corruptions of reflection, yoga, and mental engagement, to be understood. [Further:] savoring the pleasure of attainment in dhyāna; following after the signs of conditioned things for one who wishes to enter the signless attainment; [and] for one afflicted by bodily feelings, painful and even life-threatening [and] life-stunting feelings, hope for life, and, for one given over to that hope, grieving, exhaustion, lamentation. These are the ten dharmas adverse to training.

What ten dharmas, as antidotes to these ten dharmas adverse to the bases of training, are conducive to training?

Namely: perception of the unattractive [aśubha], [Damaged/Conjectural: perception of impermanence (anitya),] perception of suffering in the impermanent, perception of non-self in suffering, perception of food as repugnant, perception of non-delight in the whole world, perception of light [āloka-saṁjñā], perception of dispassion [virāga], perception of cessation [nirodha], [and] perception of death [maraṇa]. These ten perceptions, resorted to, cultivated, [and] made much of, lead to the abandonment of the ten dharmas adverse to training, [i.e., to the removal of] the tenfold path-obstruction. Now: the light of Dharma, the light of meaning, the light of calm [śamatha], and the light of insight [vipaśyanā] — making these lights predominant, the perception of light is what is intended in this connection. It is by [this] mental engagement of investigation and yoga that the path-obstruction is abandoned.

Now, another ten dharmas conducive to training are to be understood.

Which ten?

Namely: [1] prior cause, [2] appropriate instruction, [3] thorough application, [4] continual respectful exertion, [5] intense desire, [6] the establishment of the power of yoga [— and, as below: 7 pacification of bodily-mental encumbrance, 8 repeated reflection, 9 non-distress, 10 freedom from conceit]. — What is the prior cause? That which is the prior ripening of the faculties, and the perfecting of the faculties. What is appropriate instruction? That instruction which is unperverted and graduated.

What is thorough application?

Just as one has been instructed, so does one apply oneself; and applying himself thus, he produces right view.

What is continual respectful exertion?

In six modes of application he passes a fruitful time, in the wholesome side, and quickly brings the wholesome side to its full development.

What is intense desire?

As when he generates eagerness for the further deliverance: ‘When shall I enter and dwell in that sphere in which the noble ones, having entered, dwell?’

What is the establishment of the power of yoga?

By two causes one comes to possess the power of yoga: by being sharp-faculty by nature, and by long-time practice. [Now] the [pacification of] body-mind encumbrance, [resulting in] joy [and] tranquillity: as when, for one whose body is wearied, fatigued, body-encumbrance and mind-encumbrance arise — he pacifies them by adopting a different posture; [when] through excessive applied thought and sustained thought body-mind encumbrance arises, then by application to the calming of his own mind he pacifies it; [when] through contraction of mind, through mental lethargy, an enwrapping of sloth-and-torpor arises, he pacifies that body-mind encumbrance by higher-wisdom dharma-insight and by mental engagement that gladdens. Or [when,] for one in whose case defilement is by nature abandoned, the body-mind encumbrance on the defilement side has not departed [and] continues to follow, he pacifies it by cultivation of the right path.

What is repeated reflection?

With respect to the virtues, he repeatedly reflects on what was done badly and what was done well, [and] reviews what was left undone, and what done; he turns away from what was done badly and from what was left undone, [and] from what was done well [and] done, he does not turn back. Likewise, making investigative mental engagement predominant with respect to the abandoned and not-yet-abandoned defilements, he reflects repeatedly; [and,] knowing what has been abandoned, again and again he cultivates that very path. What is non-distress? — When [the time is right] for what is to be known, to be seen, to be attained, [but] not knowing, not seeing, not attaining that, distress arises: mental fatigue, mental affliction; when it has arisen, he does not accommodate it, [but] abandons it.

What is freedom from conceit?

With respect to direct realization and attainment, with respect to touching, he is free from conceit. He grasps without distortion: with respect to what is attained, he has the perception ‘attained’; with respect to what is realized, the perception ‘realized.’ Thus these ten dharmas, for the yogin who desires training, from beginning to middle to end, conform to training; they do not run counter to it. Therefore they are called dharmas conducive to training.

What, there, is loss of yoga?

Answer: four kinds of loss of yoga.

Which four?

There is final loss of yoga; there is temporary; there is loss-by-falling-away; there is loss caused by wrong practice. There, final loss of yoga is to be understood with reference to persons who have no place for yoga. Because they are of a nature not to attain nirvāṇa, they are absolutely fallen away from yoga. There, the temporary: namely, those who, established in the lineage, of a nature to attain nirvāṇa, but lacking the conditions — for they, even after going far and very far, will surely come upon the conditions and, bringing forth yoga, will cultivate and reach final nirvāṇa. For them, by that very fact, the loss is only temporary. There, loss of yoga by falling away from what has been attained: as when someone here falls back from what has been attained and gained — the dwelling of touch of knowing-and-seeing. There, loss of yoga caused by wrong practice: as when someone here applying himself unwisely does not succeed in yoga; he does not succeed in the wholesome dharma worthy of being meditated upon. As when someone here is full of defilements, of much-dust nature, and is also possessed of great learning, great intellect, endowed with great intelligence. He takes up the scriptures, masters the scriptures, little or much; and dwelling in the forest, by his preaching of Dharma he gratifies the minds of those who come — householders and renouncers, straight persons, straightforward by nature. By behavior pursued out of pretense, connected with body and speech, by that condition, by that means there arises for him gain, honor, fame; he becomes known, a great recipient of gains, of robes, alms, dwelling-place, medicine, requisites, and he is honored, respected by kings, royal ministers, even by caravan leaders, attaining the standing of an arhat. Around him gather disciples, householders, renouncers. [Damaged]: Even in remote roads villages or market-towns continue around him … there occurs to him: ‘There are disciples, householders and renouncers, who hold me in high regard, who hold me as great. If they were to come to me and ask a question concerning yoga, mental engagement, calm or insight, and I, asked, were to answer, ‘I do not know,’ — then the regard they have would diminish, would lessen, and I would no longer be reputed as an arhat. Better that I myself think it out, weigh it, examine it, and so establish a yoga.’ Making this very thing predominant, greedy for gain and honor, alone and in seclusion, he himself thinks it out, weighs it, examines it, and so establishes a yoga. And that yoga of his is not in the discourses, is not seen in the vinaya, and runs counter to the natural order. ‘These monks of mine who are sūtra-bearers, vinaya-bearers, mātṛkā-bearers — I conceal that yoga-topic from them and do not reveal. Those who are my disciples, householders and renouncers — them too I direct in the practice of yoga. For why? Let it not be that those sūtra-bearers, vinaya-bearers, mātṛkā-bearers, hearing that yoga-topic, would introduce it into the sūtras. And they would not introduce it or display it in the vinaya. And when examined against the natural order, it would not be seen [there]. And it would run counter to the natural order. And they, on that account, would be discontented, would chide me with disapproving words, and would raise disputes. Thus I would once more not be honored, not held as great by kings, royal ministers, the wealthy, the chiefs, the caravan leaders, and would no longer be a recipient of robes, alms, dwelling, medicine, and requisites.’ Making that very desire for gain and honor predominant, perceiving as Dharma what is not Dharma, having set up a distorted perception, he elucidates non-Dharma as Dharma, proclaims it. And those who come into his view’s persuasion, they too in non-dharma have the perception of dharma. Through dullness and delusion, they have the perception of dharma in non-dharma; even when instructed accordingly and practicing, they are practicing wrongly — so it should be known. This kind of loss of yoga produced by wrong practice is a counterfeit of the true dharma, a false dharma that tends to the disappearance of the true dharma. These four kinds of loss of yoga are to be recognized and avoided by the meditator bhikṣu who is a yogācāra.

What, then, is yoga?

Answer: yoga is fourfold, namely faith, desire, energy, and means. Of these, faith is two-fold by basis — confidence-form and clarity-form, with the basis of analytical reasoning in the dharma, and the basis of assured trust in [the realization of] the person. Desire too is fourfold, namely for attainment, as when someone here engenders eagerness for further deliverance, in detail as before. For inquiry, as when someone here engenders eagerness, in detail as before, for inquiry, for going to the hermitage, into the company of wise fellow brahma-farers who know yoga, for the hearing of what has not been heard, for the clarification of what has been heard. Desire for the gathering of the requisites; as when someone here generates progressively higher eagerness for the purification of the restraint of virtue, of the restraint of the senses, knowing the right measure in food, application to wakefulness, dwelling with full awareness. Desire for application; as when one engenders longing, yearning, willingness, in continual application and in respectful application to cultivation of the path — this is the fourfold desire. This is the fourfold desire, namely: for attainment, for inquiry, for the gathering of the requisites, and for application. There vigor too is fourfold, namely: for hearing, for reflection, for cultivation, and for the purification of hindrances. There, vigor for hearing: for one hearing what has not been heard, clarifying it; mental exertion and uninterrupted application. Likewise [there is vigor for reflection] when, alone and secluded, one reflects on, weighs, [and] examines the meaning of the dharmas as heard; [vigor for cultivation] when, having entered retreat, one from time to time cultivates calm and insight; [and vigor for purification of hindrances] when, applied night and day, one purifies the mind of hindrances by walking and sitting. Whatever mental exertion and uninterrupted application [there is in these cases] — that is the long-sustained commitment there. Means too is fourfold, namely: making the restraint of virtue and restraint of senses predominant, well-established mindfulness; and so for one whose mindfulness is established, vigilance, the guarding of the mind, the resort to wholesome dharmas; likewise, for one who is heedful, inward application to mental calm, and the higher-wisdom of dharma-insight. This yoga is fourfold and is of sixteen aspects. There, through faith, one takes the goal to be attained as predominant. Out of trust in attainment, one generates the willingness to do wholesome dharmas. So willing to act, applied night and day, he dwells enthusiastic, of firm exertion. And this vigor, undertaken and held, leads to the attainment of the not-attained, to the realization of the not-realized, to the direct touching of the not-yet-touched. It conduces. Therefore these four dharmas are called yoga.

Now, what is mental engagement [manaskāra]?

[There are] four mental engagements. Which four? Namely: forceful, interrupted, uninterrupted, and effortless. [The text first gives a brief account, then a fuller one. — Briefly:] for the one steadying [the mind] and discerning dharmas, until he attains [stable] mental engagement, his is forceful mental engagement [bala-vāhana]: by force he holds the mind down and establishes it in one-pointedness; hence it is called ‘forceful.’ [Here begins the full account. — The four are:] forceful, interrupted, uninterrupted, and effortless.

What is forceful mental engagement?

Namely, for the beginner steadying the mind inwardly and stabilizing it, discerning dharmas, until he attains [stable] mental engagement, his is forceful mental engagement: by force he holds the mind down and establishes it in one-pointedness; hence it is called forceful.

What is interrupted mental engagement?

[sa-cchidra-vāhana is] that lakṣaṇa-pratisaṁvedī attention of one who has gained attention and is proceeding by the worldly path or by the supramundane [path]. Thus indeed concentration is established there by reflection (cintayā); not exclusively by the cultivation-mode. Then the niś-chidra-vāhana attention: [the range] from above the lakṣaṇa-pratisaṁvedī attention up through the prayoganiṣṭha attentions. Then the anābhoga-vāhana attention: the prayoganiṣṭhāphala attention. [There are] four other attentions [for the laukika path], namely: ānulomika (conformable), prātipakṣika (antidote), prasadanīya (gladdening), and pratyavekṣaṇīya (examining). For one who has gained [stable] mental engagement and proceeds by the worldly path, [there are] four other mental engagements, namely: ānulomika (conforming), prātipakṣika (counteractive), prasadanīya (clarifying), and pratyavekṣaṇīya (reviewing). Conforming mental engagement: that by which one finds fault with the object [of the lower stage] and undertakes right application — but does not yet abandon defilement.

The counteractive: that by which one abandons defilement. The clarifying: that by which one releases a contracted mind through uplifting signs, gladdens it, [and] takes hold of it. The reviewing mental engagement: namely, mental engagement of investigation, making which predominant, one reviews the abandoned and not-yet-abandoned state of [the] defilements.

Now, for one engaging the object mentally, how many signs are to be mentally engaged?

Answer: four, namely: the object-sign [ālambana-nimitta], [the cause-sign, nidāna-nimitta;] the sign to be avoided [parivarjanīya-nimitta], and the sign to be resorted to [niṣevaṇīya-nimitta]. The object-sign: the reflection that resembles the knowable thing, [its] semblance.

The cause-sign: namely, the accumulation of the requisites of concentration, appropriate instruction, accompanied by cultivation, intense desire, urgency with respect to things that arouse urgency, the full knowledge of distraction and non-distraction, and attentiveness; and externally, [freedom from] disturbance — whether caused by human beings, by non-humans, by sound, or by ill-will. [Likewise] with insight as forerunner, inner contraction of mind [is the cause-sign]; for the further intensified insight, [there is] the further cause-sign; likewise, calm-led insight; [and] for further intensified calm, [there is] the further cause-sign. The sign-to-be-avoided is fourfold, namely: sign of slackness [laya], sign of agitation [auddhatya], sign of attachment, [and] sign of distraction. The sign of slackness: that by which, through the object-sign and the cause-sign, the mind goes to slackness. The agitation: that by which, through the object-sign and the cause-sign, the mind arises stirred. The sign of attachment: that by which, through the object-sign [or] through the cause-sign, the mind is enamored of the object, is impassioned, is defiled. The sign of distraction: that by which, through the object-sign and the cause-sign, the mind is thrown outward and distracted. Now, [as for] these signs — on the concentrated plane, by these mental engagements, one resolves upon the object.

How many resolves [adhimokṣa] are there?

Answer: nine resolves, namely: luminous and not-luminous, dull, sharp, limited, great, boundless, pure, and not-pure.

The luminous resolve: when the light-sign is well grasped, [the resolve] is accompanied by light. The not-luminous resolve: [Damaged/Conjectural]: namely, when the light-sign is not well grasped, [the resolve is] accompanied by darkness. The dull resolve: the one falling within the continuum of mild faculties. The sharp resolve: that falling within the continuum of sharp faculties. The limited resolve: [the one made] with limited faith, desire, concentration, and a limited object. Thus, from the limited-ness of the mental engagement and of the object — [there is the] limited resolve.

The great resolve: the resolve which, made great, accompanied by faith and desire, resolves upon a great object — such a resolve is, from the greatness of mental engagement and the greatness of the object, the great resolve. The boundless resolve: [the one which,] boundless, accompanied by faith and desire, resolves upon an endless, boundless object. This resolve is, from the boundlessness of mental engagement and of the object, the boundless resolve. The pure resolve: [the one] well developed, completed, arrived at its conclusion. The not-pure: [the one] not well cultivated, not completed, not arrived at its conclusion.

How many are the tasks [karaṇīya] of yoga?

Answer: four.

Which four?

Namely: [1] cessation of the basis [āśraya-nirodha], [2] transformation of the basis [āśraya-parivṛtti], [3] full knowledge of the object, [and 4] delight in the object. Cessation of the basis: for one engaged in the cultivation of preparatory mental engagement, the basis attended by encumbrance is gradually brought to cessation, and the basis transforms into one accompanied by tranquillity. This is the cessation of the basis, this is the transformation of the basis — [these are] the [first two] tasks of yoga. [As for] the full knowledge of the object and delight in the object: there is [a] full knowledge of the object and delight in the object led by cessation and transformation of the basis; [and] when making full knowledge of the object and delight in the object predominant, the basis ceases and is transformed. [Also,] there is [a] full knowledge of the object and delight in the object led by the purity of the basis: making the purity of the basis predominant, [a] perfectly pure knowledge of the object arises at the time of the completion of the task, and [a] delight [in the object likewise arises]. Hence one says: ‘four are the tasks of yoga.’

How many practitioners of yoga [yogācāra] are there?

Answer: three, namely: the beginner [ādikarmika], the experienced one [kṛta-paricaya], and one who has gone beyond mental engagement [atikrānta-manaskāra].

The beginner practitioner of yoga is twofold: beginner with respect to mental engagement, and beginner with respect to purification of defilements.

The beginner with respect to mental engagement: the first-time practitioner in one-pointedness who has not yet attained [stable] mental engagement, [who] has not [yet] touched mental one-pointedness. The beginner with respect to purification of defilements: though he has attained mental engagement, [he is one] who, wishing to liberate his mind from defilement, [is engaged in] the undertaking, the holding, [and] the practicing of the mental engagement that is conscious-of-characteristics [lakṣaṇa-pratisaṁvedī]. This is the beginner with respect to purification of defilements.

What is the experienced one?

Apart from the mental engagement conscious-of-characteristics, when the other six mental engagements that culminate in application [the standard seven attentions, see sbh4.1] have been made habitual, he becomes the experienced [one]. ‘One who has gone beyond mental engagement’ is to be known with respect to the mental engagement which is the fruit of completion of practice: he has gone beyond the mental engagement of yoga-cultivation, [and] is established in the fruit of cultivation. Therefore he is called ‘one who has gone beyond mental engagement.’ Moreover, [a second classification:] taking up the wholesome dharma-desire, while engaged and not yet producing the wholesome roots conducive to penetration [nirvedha-bhāgīya], for that long he is a beginner. When, however, he produces the penetration-conducive ones — namely the warmth [uṣmagata], the summits [mūrdhan], truth-conforming patiences [satya-anulomikī kṣānti], [and] the supreme worldly dharmas [laukikāgra-dharma] — then he is the experienced one. When, however, he enters the fixed course of rightness [samyaktva-niyāma], and realizes the [four noble] truths, he becomes one who does not depend on another, who is not led by another in the Teacher’s dispensation — then he is one who has gone beyond mental engagement.

There, what is the cultivation of yoga?

Answer: twofold: cultivation of perception, and cultivation of awakening-factors.

There, what is cultivation of perception?

Namely: one engaged on the worldly path cultivates the perception of disadvantage in all the lower stages. Or, engaged for abandonment, in the realm of abandonment, in the realm of dispassion, in the realm of cessation, seeing them as peaceful, he cultivates the perception of abandonment, the perception of dispassion, the perception of cessation. Or, engaged for calm, he cultivates the perception of high-and-low on the calm side. Engaged in insight, he then cultivates the perception on the insight side. Engaged in insight, he reviews this body, just as it is, just as it is set up, upward from the soles of the feet, downward from the hair of the head, full of various impurities. ‘In this body there are head-hairs, body-hairs…’ as before. And afterwards, the practitioner properly grasps just that particular review-sign, well and thoroughly, attends to it well, draws it up clearly, well penetrated. Namely: standing, he reviews someone seated; seated, one lying down; one going in front, or going behind, he reviews. This very thing illustrates insight-mode review of conditioned things of the three times, dependently arisen. There, when it says ‘standing, he reviews someone seated,’ by this present mental engagement, future knowable is reviewed. Present mental-engagement, having arisen, is called ‘standing.’ Future knowable state, from non-arising and from being on the verge of arising, is called ‘seated.’ When it further says, ‘seated, he reviews someone lying down,’ by this, by a present mental engagement the review of the past knowable is illustrated. For the present mental-engagement state, facing cessation, is called ‘seated.’ The past, from being ceased, knowable state, is called ‘lying down.’ When further it says, ‘one going in front he reviews,’ by this, by present mental engagement, the review of immediately-preceding-ceased mental engagement is illustrated. There, the mental engagement which has arisen and immediately ceased: that ‘goes in front.’ There, immediately arising, immediately-arisen mental engagement, newly arising, grasping each immediately-ceased one in turn, ‘goes behind.’ There, cultivating calm and insight, he cultivates the perception of light on both sides. This is the cultivation of perception.

There, what is the cultivation of awakening-factors?

The practice of the thirty-seven dharmas favorable to awakening, the familiarization, the resort, the making-much-of — this is called the cultivation of awakening-factors. Namely: the four foundations of mindfulness, the four right exertions, the four bases of psychic power, the five faculties, the five powers, the seven awakening-factors, and the noble eightfold path. Foundation of mindfulness in the body, in feelings, in mind, in dharmas. For unarisen evil unwholesome dharmas, that they may not arise, he generates desire, exerts himself, arouses energy. He grips the mind, exerts it. For the right exertion. For the abandonment of arisen evil unwholesome dharmas. For the arising of unarisen wholesome dharmas. For the stability of arisen wholesome dharmas, for non-forgetting, for fullness of cultivation, for increase, for development to fullness, he generates desire and exerts himself. He arouses energy. He grips the mind, exerts it — this is right exertion. The bases of psychic power are those endowed with desire-concentration, energy-concentration, mind-concentration, and investigation-concentration, together with formative impulses for abandonment; then come the faculties of faith, energy, mindfulness, concentration, wisdom; the powers of faith, [Damaged/Conjectural: energy,] mindfulness, concentration, wisdom; and the awakening-factor of mindfulness. Right view. Right intention, right speech, action, livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.

Now, what is the body?

What is the contemplation of body in body [kāye kāyānupaśyanā]?

What is mindfulness [smṛti]?

What are the foundations of mindfulness [smṛtyupasthāna]?

Answer: the body is of thirty-five kinds — namely: internal and external; comprised by a sense-faculty, and not comprised by a sense-faculty; reckoned as a sentient being, and reckoned as not a sentient being; accompanied by encumbrance [dauṣṭhulya], and accompanied by tranquillity [praśrabdhi]; elemental body [bhautika] and derived-from-elements body [upādāya-bhautika]; name-body [nāma-kāya] and form-body [rūpa-kāya]; the body of a hell-being, of an animal, of a hungry ghost; of a human, of a deva; endowed with consciousness, and without consciousness; inner body and outer body; transformed and not transformed.

Female body, male body, eunuch body; friend’s body, foe’s body, indifferent body. Inferior body, middle body, superior body; child body, young body, old body. This much is the division of body. Contemplation [anupaśyanā], in turn, is threefold: with body as predominant, wisdom born of hearing, [Damaged/Conjectural: wisdom born of reflection,] or wisdom born of cultivation [śruta-mayī, cintā-mayī, or bhāvanā-mayī prajñā]. By that wisdom one fully examines the whole body in every aspect rightly, ascertains, penetrates, follows after it. This is the foundation of mindfulness with body as predominant.

Of the dharmas grasped [by hearing], their meaning [reflected upon], and what is realized [by cultivation]: with respect to the letter, the meaning, and direct realization, that non-forgetfulness of mind which asks, ‘are these dharmas of mine well-grasped or not,’ ‘well-marked or not by wisdom in each case,’ ‘well-touched, well-contacted, by liberation or not’ — the establishing of mindfulness in these matters is the foundation of mindfulness. Moreover, the foundation of mindfulness serves for the guarding [done] by mindfulness, for the non-defilement of objects, and for the binding and tying down [of mindfulness] to the object. Of these, the guarding by mindfulness is as said before: ‘there is established guarded mindfulness, mindfulness alert.’ The non-defilement of objects is, as said, ‘with mind guarded by mindfulness, well-established in his stance, he does not seize signs, does not seize secondary features,’ and so on at length, he guards. He attains restraint of the mind-faculty by the mind-faculty. The binding to the object is, as said, the binding of mindfulness to the four objects [ālambana]. Namely: pervasive object [vyāpī], conduct-purifying [carita-viśodhana], skill object [kauśalya], defilement-purifying [kleśa-viśodhana] — mindfulness well-established by these three modes is called the foundation of mindfulness.

Now, what is feeling [vedanā]?

Namely: pleasant, painful, and neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. The pleasant is bodily, and so too the painful and the neither-painful-nor-pleasant. As they are bodily, so they are mental. Pleasant with worldly attachments [sāmiṣa], and likewise the painful and the neither-painful-nor-pleasant. So too without worldly attachments [nirāmiṣa]; so too dependent on greed [gardhāśrita] and dependent on renunciation [naiṣkramyāśrita] — whether the feeling is pleasant, painful, or neither-painful-nor-pleasant. Thus feeling is of twenty-one kinds, or of nine kinds.

Now, what is mind [citta]?

Namely: mind with lust, [Damaged/Conjectural: without lust;] with hatred, without hatred; with delusion, without delusion; contracted, distracted; slack, gripped; elated, not-elated; calmed, not-calmed; concentrated, not-concentrated; well-cultivated, not-well-cultivated; well-released, not-well-released. Thus, in summary, the mind is of twenty kinds.

Now, what are dharmas?

Lust and the subduing of lust; hatred and the subduing of hatred; delusion and the subduing of delusion; contraction and distraction; slackness and grip; agitation and non-agitation; calming and non-calming; well-concentrated and not-well-concentrated; well-cultivated path and not-well-cultivated path; well-cultivated release and not-well-cultivated release. These twenty dharmas are to be understood as established on the dark and bright sides, on the side of defilement and on the side of purification. Of these, pleasant feeling is that which arises in dependence upon a contact to-be-felt-as-pleasant — the agreeable, the felt, what has come into the state of being felt. That which is associated with the five [sense-]consciousnesses is bodily. That which is associated with mind-consciousness is mental. As with ‘to-be-felt-as-pleasant,’ so too with ‘to-be-felt-as-painful’ and ‘to-be-felt-as-neither-painful-nor-pleasant’ — that which arises in dependence on contact: the disagreeable, the neither-agreeable-nor-disagreeable, the felt, the gone-to-dispassion. What has come into the state of being felt — this is called painful or neither-painful-nor-pleasant feeling. That which is associated with the five [sense-]consciousnesses is bodily. That which is associated with mind-consciousness is mental. That which is favorable to nirvāṇa is penetrative. For ultimate completion, for ultimate purification, for the ultimate end of the holy life — it leads. That is without worldly attachments.

That which has fallen into the [three] realms, fallen into [cyclic] becoming — that is with worldly attachments. That which is connected with form and the formless [realms], or favorable to dispassion — that is dependent on renunciation. That which is connected with the body and not favorable to dispassion — that is dependent on greed.

Mind with lust is the mind seized by lust with respect to a lust-arousing object. Mind without lust is free from the seizure of lust. Mind with hatred is the mind seized by hatred with respect to a hateful object. Mind without hatred is free from the seizure of hatred. Mind with delusion is [Damaged]: what is seized in respect of an object of delusion … these six minds are to be understood as accompanied by movement. Three are on the side of defilement. Three are antidotal to defilement. A contracted mind is one inwardly bound to itself by the mode of calm. A distracted mind is one scattered outwardly upon the five strands of sense-pleasure. A slack mind is the one accompanied by sloth-and-torpor; a gripped mind is one well-established by a clarifying object. An agitated mind is one bound to the seizure of agitation through over-grasping; a not-agitated mind is one which, when in the time of gripping or the time of contraction, attains equanimity. A calmed mind is one liberated from the hindrances; not-calmed, one not yet liberated. A concentrated mind is one liberated from the hindrances and entered into the basic dhyāna; not-well-concentrated, one not yet entered. A well-cultivated mind is that of one who, by long practice of this very concentration, attains [it] at will, attains [it] without difficulty, attains [it] quickly. A not-well-cultivated mind is to be understood by the opposite. A well-released mind is one completely and entirely released. A not-well-released mind is one not completely or entirely released — thus these fourteen [further] minds are to be understood as states of dwelling. Beginning from the stage of purification from hindrances, eight minds are to be known as states of dwelling: distracted, contracted, on up to calmed, not-calmed. Beginning from purification of defilement, six minds: on up to well-released mind, not-well-released. When, with hindrance present inwardly, he knows ‘I have a hindrance’; when not present, he knows ‘I have no hindrance’; and how the arising of an unarisen hindrance occurs, that too; how, having arisen, it departs, that too he knows. When an eye-fetter is present, on up to a mind-fetter, ‘I have a mind-fetter’; when none is present, ‘I have no mind-fetter’ — thus he knows. And how the arising of an unarisen mind-fetter occurs, that too he knows. And how the cessation of an arisen one occurs, that too he knows. When the mindfulness-awakening-factor [smṛti-saṃbodhyaṅga] is inwardly present, he knows, ‘I have the mindfulness-awakening-factor.’ When absent, he knows, ‘I have it not.’ And how the arising of an unarisen mindfulness-awakening-factor occurs, that too he knows. And how the stability of an arisen one occurs — its non-forgetting, its cultivation, its fullness, further increase, extensiveness — that too he knows. As with the mindfulness-awakening-factor when present inwardly, so likewise the [remaining six] awakening-factors — dharma-discrimination [dharma-pravicaya], energy [vīrya], [Damaged/Conjectural: joy (prīti),] tranquillity [praśrabdhi], concentration [samādhi], and equanimity [upekṣā] — are to be understood. For the full knowledge of defiled dharmas by way of own-nature, disadvantage, and antidote, this serves as the foundation of mindfulness in dharmas. Just as the contemplation of body in body falls on the foundation-of-mindfulness side, so the contemplation of feeling in feelings, of mind in mind, and of dharmas in dharmas, is to be understood as appropriate.

How, then, does he dwell contemplating the body in the body internally?

How externally? How internally-and-externally?

When inwardly, in himself, he sees the body in the body reckoned as a sentient being — thus inwardly he dwells contemplating body in body.

How externally? How internally-and-externally?

When externally he takes as object form reckoned as non-sentient — thus he dwells contemplating body in body externally. When externally he takes as object intermingled form reckoned as sentient — thus he dwells contemplating body in body both internally-and-externally. Now, when inwardly he takes up subtle form reckoned as a sentient being, and takes as object the feelings, mind, and dharmas that have arisen [in dependence on it], internally — in feelings, in mind, in dharmas — he dwells contemplating dharmas in dharmas. When he takes up external form reckoned as non-sentient and takes as object the feelings, mind, and dharmas arising thereon, externally — in feelings, mind, dharmas — he dwells contemplating dharmas in dharmas. When externally he takes up outer sentient form and takes as object the feelings, mind, dharmas arising thereon, he dwells contemplating dharmas in dharmas both internally-and-externally.

Another sequence: when he takes sense-faculty-grasped form as object, internally he dwells contemplating body in body. When non-sense-faculty-grasped form, classified [as form] and unclung-to, is taken as object — externally he dwells contemplating body in body. When non-sense-faculty-grasped form, internally accessed and clung-to, is taken as object — internally-and-externally he dwells contemplating body in body. When non-sense-faculty-grasped form, classified [as form] and unclung-to, is taken as object — externally he dwells contemplating body in body. When non-sense-faculty-grasped form, internally accessed and clung-to, is taken as object — internally-and-externally he dwells contemplating body in body. Thus, taking up the threefold form just described as [the basis for] feelings, mind, and dharmas that have arisen — and taking them as object, he dwells contemplating accordingly. So one should understand. Another sequence: when he takes as object form belonging to the concentrated plane and accompanied by tranquillity — thus inwardly he dwells contemplating body in body. When he takes as object subtle form, inwardly, of the concentrated plane, accompanied by encumbrance — thus he dwells externally contemplating body in body. When he takes as object form accompanied by another’s encumbrance and accompanied by tranquillity — internally-and-externally he dwells contemplating body in body. So too with the feelings, mind, dharmas arising in dependence on it. Another sequence: when he takes inward elemental form as object, inwardly he dwells contemplating body in body. When outer elemental form is taken as object — externally he dwells contemplating body in body. And when, taking up elemental form and taking up that which has arisen as sense-faculty-and-object, he takes [such] form as object — internally-and-externally he dwells contemplating body in body. So too with the feelings, mind, dharmas arising in dependence — these are to be understood as appropriate. Another sequence: when inwardly he takes the body endowed with consciousness as object, thus inwardly he dwells contemplating body in body. When consciousness-less form reckoned as a sentient being is taken as object — in states such as the blue-livid corpse and so on — externally he dwells contemplating body in body. And when one takes the consciousness-less form together with its prior conscious state in past time, and the consciousness-less form together with [the implied] state in future time, in their like-naturedness and sameness of nature — taking these as object, internally-and-externally he dwells contemplating body in body. So too the feelings, mind, dharmas arising in dependence are to be understood appropriately. Another sequence: when one takes one’s own inner body — by way of head-hair, body-hair, nails, and so on — as object, internally-and-externally one dwells contemplating body in body.

When one takes others’ inner body — by way of head-hair, body-hair, nails, and so on — as object, externally one dwells contemplating body in body; and [when] inwardly the mind [takes as object] the outer body undergoing change to blue-livid, etc., aspects, and [when], externally, the outer body, changing and unchanging, is taken as object by way of aspects such as the blue-livid corpse on the basis of like-naturedness — externally one dwells contemplating body in body. Taking it up, the feelings, mind, dharmas arising on it are to be understood as appropriate. Thus, in the body, the corresponding modes by way of distinction of feelings, mind, and dharmas are to be understood as manifold. Here only a few modes have been elucidated. Now, as antidote to the four perversions [viparyāsa], the Blessed One established the four foundations of mindfulness. As antidote to the perversion ‘[seeing] the pure in the unclean,’ the foundation of mindfulness on the body was established. Thus by the Blessed One, in the cultivation of the body-foundation-of-mindfulness, four cemetery-meditations [aśubha-bhāvanā] connected with the unattractive are taught, which, frequently engaged with and attended to, lead to the abandonment of the perversion ‘the pure in the unclean.’ As antidote to the perversion ‘[seeing] the pleasant in the painful,’ the foundation of mindfulness on feeling is established. Dwelling contemplating feeling, he knows, as it truly is, ‘whatever is felt, that is in the field of suffering’; and thus, for him, the perversion ‘pleasant in the painful’ is abandoned. As antidote to the ‘permanent in the impermanent’ perversion, the foundation of mindfulness [on mind] is established. For him, perceiving — by way of the distinction into minds-with-lust and so on — the manifold and varied minds of those nights and days, of those moments, instants, and hours, the ‘permanent in the impermanent’ perversion is abandoned. And as antidote to the ‘self in the not-self’ perversion, the foundation of mindfulness on dharmas is established. For him, on account of the existence of defilements such as self-view and so on, and on account of the non-existence of wholesome dharmas such as the view of non-self, there is the seeing of self in the aggregates and not in something else. For one who contemplates dharma and non-dharma by specific characteristic and general characteristic, seeing as it is, the perversion ‘self in non-self’ is abandoned. Another sequence: for in the world this is how things commonly run. In the aggregates, not knowing the mere aggregates, the mere dharmas, as they truly are — as in the body taken as resort, and that which is taken as resort is defiled and purified by the dharmas of pleasure and pain and by dharma and non-dharma — for the removal of confusion about the [supposed] self’s basis-of-resort, the foundation of mindfulness on the body is established. For the removal of confusion about that same self’s basis-of-experiencing, the foundation of mindfulness on feeling is established. Where, by self-grasping in mind, in mentality, in consciousness [citta-manas-vijñāna], [the foundation of mindfulness on mind is established]. Another sequence: where one performs action, and for what purpose, and what action one performs, for what purpose one performs, and what action one performs, [Damaged]: … and by what means one performs — all of that, summed up into one, the four foundations of mindfulness are established. Namely: in the body one acts, for the sake of feeling, with the mind, by means of wholesome and unwholesome dharmas. Another sequence: where one is defiled, where purified, by what one is defiled, and by what purified — all this, gathered into one, the four foundations of mindfulness are established. Namely: in the body one is defiled and purified. Through the feelings the mind is defiled by dharmas, and purified. Now, what is the meaning of ‘foundation of mindfulness’? Answer: where one establishes mindfulness, and by what one establishes it, that is called the foundation of mindfulness. Where one establishes mindfulness — that is the object-foundation-of-mindfulness [ālambana-smṛtyupasthāna]; by what one establishes mindfulness, that — the wisdom and mindfulness that uphold concentration — is the own-nature foundation of mindfulness [svabhāva-smṛtyupasthāna]. And other mental and mental-factor dharmas associated with them are the conjunction-foundation-of-mindfulness [saṃsarga-smṛtyupasthāna]. Moreover, the path arising with body and feeling as predominant, wholesome, with-flux or flux-less — that is the foundation of mindfulness. Further, it is born of hearing, born of reflection, or born of cultivation. Of these, the hearing-born and reflection-born are only with-flux. The cultivation-born may be either with flux or fluxless.

Thus, gaining experience in the four foundations of mindfulness, taking away the gross perversion, knowing both wholesome and unwholesome dharmas, immediately afterwards [he undertakes the four right exertions]: for the non-arising of unarisen evil unwholesome dharmas, for the abandonment of arisen ones, for the arising of unarisen wholesome dharmas, for the stability of arisen ones — in detail as before, on up to ‘he grips the mind, exerts it.’

Now, what are evil unwholesome dharmas?

Whatever, in the realm of desire, is the defiled bodily action, verbal action, or mental action — comprised in the wrong-conduct of body, speech, and mind. And the defilements which engender these: those not yet co-arisen, not yet manifest, are the unarisen; those that have co-arisen and are manifest are the arisen. The wholesome dharmas — those that are antidotal to them, antidotal to misconduct, antidotal to hindrances, antidotal to fetters — these too, in their unarisen state, are to be understood likewise. Now, with respect to the arisen evil unwholesome dharmas: when, for the non-arising of unarisen evil unwholesome dharmas, he generates eagerness, he vows, ‘I will not, completely, entirely, in any way, let them arise.’ Thus he generates the will. Of those that have arisen and co-arisen: ‘I will not allow them at all, I shall abandon them, shall dispel them.’ And for the unarisen, before evil unwholesome arises, he generates eagerness, he vows. He becomes one wishing not to accommodate. This is the desire for abandonment of what has arisen. These evil unwholesome dharmas arise taking past, future, or present objects. Those based on past or future state are remote-object-based; those based on the spoken or present object are present-object-based. Now, for the non-arising of unarisen evil unwholesome dharmas based on remote objects, and for the abandonment of arisen ones, he exerts himself. And as for those based on present objects — for the non-arising of unarisen and the abandonment of arisen, he arouses energy. For only by firm rousing of energy is there non-arising of these, or abandonment. Moreover, for the non-arising of unarisen mild-and-middling co-existence states, and for the abandonment of arisen ones, he exerts himself. For the non-arising of unarisen strong co-existence-states, and for the abandonment of arisen ones, he arouses energy. If he moves in a past object, he moves in such a way that no defilement arises in him from that object. If through forgetfulness one does arise, he does not accommodate it, he abandons it, puts an end to it. As with past objects, so future is to be understood. Thus it is said: for the non-arising of unarisen evil unwholesome dharmas and for the abandonment of arisen ones, he exerts himself. If he moves in a present object, he moves in such a way that no defilement arises through that object. If through forgetfulness it arises, the arisen he does not accommodate, he abandons, dispels, puts an end to it. Thus it is said: for the non-arising of unarisen evil unwholesome dharmas, and for the abandonment of arisen ones, he arouses energy. Some evil unwholesome dharmas arise through the power of intention, not through the power of the object; some arise through both — through the power of the object and the power of intention. Of these, the ones that arise through the power of intention are, as when dwelling, those based on past and future objects. And the ones that arise through the power of defilement together with the power of the object are, as when moving, those that arise through a present object. In either case there is inevitably improper attention [ayoniśo-manaskāra]. Now, for the non-arising of unarisen ones that arise through power of intention, and for the abandonment of arisen ones, he exerts himself. For those that arise through power of object together with power of intention — for the non-arising of unarisen, and for the abandonment of arisen — he exerts himself; for those that arise through power of object and intention, for the non-arising of unarisen and abandonment of arisen, he arouses energy. Now, ‘for the arising of unarisen wholesome dharmas, he generates desire’ means: for those wholesome dharmas not yet acquired, not yet manifest, he generates mindfulness toward their acquisition and manifesting. He sets his mind [on them]. Intense desire to obtain [them], intense desire to bring [them] to manifestation, is present in him. This is [what is meant by ‘desire’] for the arising of unarisen wholesome dharmas. ‘For the stability, non-forgetting, fullness of cultivation of arisen wholesome dharmas, he generates desire’ means: those wholesome dharmas which, having arisen, are acquired and manifest — with respect to non-loss of what has been acquired, with respect to non-falling-away from what has been acquired, [the text] says ‘for the stability’; with respect to the non-lapsing of the manifesting, [the text] says ‘for the non-forgetting’; with respect to the bringing of those very acquired and manifest wholesome dharmas to fullness, to completion by resort, [the text] says ‘for the fullness of cultivation.’ He generates eagerness, sets his mind. And intense desire-for-stability, desire-for-non-forgetting, and desire-for-fullness-of-cultivation are present. This is called the desire for stability, non-forgetting, and fullness of cultivation of arisen wholesome dharmas. Now, ‘he exerts himself’ means: he arouses energy for the manifesting of what has been acquired, and for the acquiring of what is not yet acquired. Thus he exerts himself: for the stability of arisen ones, for non-forgetting, he arouses energy, and for the fullness of cultivation. Moreover, for the arising of unarisen mild-and-middling wholesome dharmas, and for the stability of arisen ones, for non-forgetting, he exerts himself. For the arising of unarisen strong wholesome dharmas, and for the arisen, on up to fullness of cultivation, he arouses energy. He grips the mind. When that mind is engaged in calm-cultivation and one-pointedness, for the non-arising of unarisen evil unwholesome dharmas, in detail as before, on up to, for the arising of unarisen wholesome dharmas, and for the arisen, on up to fullness of cultivation, he arouses energy. He grips the mind. When that mind is engaged in calm-cultivation and one-pointedness, for the non-arising of unarisen evil unwholesome dharmas, in detail as before, on up to, for the stability of arisen wholesome dharmas, for non-forgetting, fullness of cultivation. And so [the mind], inwardly contracted, tends to slackness. Suspecting slackness, seeing it so, he takes hold of it by some uplifting sign that gladdens. He gladdens it — thus he grips the mind.

How does he settle it?

When at the time of gripping he suspects agitation and sees it so, he again contracts inwardly. He sets [the mind] toward calm. These four are the four right exertions [samyak-prahāṇa]. For the non-arising of unarisen dark-side dharmas, and for the abandonment of arisen ones — desire, striving, arousal of energy, gripping the mind, exerting it: these two right exertions are [for the dark side]. For the arising of unarisen bright-side dharmas, in detail; the [other] two right exertions are to be understood. Namely: of the dark side, the first is restraint-abandonment [saṃvara-prahāṇa], which is ‘for the abandonment of arisen evil unwholesome dharmas, he generates desire,’ in detail. The second is abandonment-of-abandonment [prahāṇa-prahāṇa]: ‘for the non-arising of unarisen, he generates desire,’ in detail. What has arisen is to be restrained, as is the evil object; what has not arisen, since it is abandoned through non-pursuit, is thereby to be abandoned through non-coming-to-manifest. The abandonment of what has been abandoned is abandonment-of-abandonment. Of the bright side, the first is cultivation-abandonment [bhāvanā-prahāṇa]: ‘for the arising of unarisen wholesome dharmas,’ as said. ‘For the arising of unarisen wholesome dharmas,’ in detail on up to ‘he grips the mind, exerts it.’ For wholesome dharmas, resorted to and cultivated, both come to be acquired when not previously acquired, and are made manifest when acquired. [The second of the bright side] is protection-abandonment [anurakṣaṇā-prahāṇa], as it is said: ‘for the stability of arisen wholesome dharmas,’ in detail on up to ‘he grips the mind, exerts it.’ For wholesome dharmas once acquired and manifest, the avoidance of negligence and resort to heedfulness is for their stability, non-forgetting, and fullness of cultivation. Thus the [Damaged/Conjectural: arisen] wholesome dharmas are protected — this is the detailed division of right exertions.

What, then, is their summary meaning?

Answer: for the relinquishing of the dark-side object and for the acquisition of the bright-side object, eagerness must be present beforehand. And for the abandonment of obsession [paryavasthāna] [it must be present]. Excellence of intention and excellence of application are required; thus they are elucidated. Excellence of intention [is achieved] by generation of desire; excellence of application, by striving, arousing energy, gripping the mind, and vigilant heedfulness. This much is the yogin’s task: for the abandonment of what is to be abandoned and for the attainment of what is to be attained, eagerness must arise beforehand; for abandoning obsession, and for abandoning underlying tendencies [anuśaya], he must rouse energy; from time to time he should cultivate the signs of calm, grip, and equanimity. And for the abandonment of obsession and of the underlying tendency, the wholesome dharmas antidotal to them are to be brought to maturity. All this is elucidated by the four right exertions — this is the summary meaning.

Now, the four concentrations [of the iddhipāda are], namely: concentration of desire [chanda-samādhi], concentration of energy [vīrya-samādhi], concentration of mind [citta-samādhi], and concentration of investigation [mīmāṃsā-samādhi]. The concentration acquired by making desire predominant is the concentration-of-desire. [Damaged]: The concentrations acquired by making energy, mind, or investigation predominant are likewise [named] … on up to the concentration of investigation. When he generates desire alone, and, with desire arisen, with respect to those evil unwholesome dharmas in their own-nature, cause, disadvantage, and antidote, rightly contemplates them, he establishes one-pointed mindfulness. Likewise, with respect to the wholesome dharmas — in their own-nature, cause, and as the way out from the unwholesome — he rightly contemplates. He establishes one-pointed mindfulness. He frequently touches one-pointedness with [desire] as predominant, [Damaged/Conjectural]: by the method of distancing the manifestation of obsession [paryavasthāna], but he does not yet eradicate latent tendency [anuśaya]. This, with respect to evil unwholesome dharmas, is called the concentration with desire as predominant. When, in a past, future, or present object — that is, an object serving as a basis for evil unwholesome dharmas, with mild, middling, or strong manifest defilement — for the non-arising of unarisen or the abandonment of arisen [dharmas], he exerts himself and arouses energy, moving in that object, and with respect to that object, by way of own-nature, cause, and antidote, rightly contemplating, establishing one-pointed mindfulness — then by the frequent dwelling-mode the one-pointedness of mind that arises eradicates the latent tendency too, by the method of distancing manifest defilement. With respect to evil unwholesome dharmas, this is the energy-predominant concentration. Again, he grips a slack mind; concentrates a gripped mind; from time to time becomes indifferent [to it]. When, by the bringing-on of wholesome dharmas, dharmas that serve as bases for evil unwholesome [states] become wholesome — with respect to those wholesome dharmas, and to dharmas that serve as bases for wholesome and unwholesome [states], he rightly contemplates them in own-nature, cause, disadvantage, benefit, antidote, and way-out; establishing one-pointed mindfulness by frequent dwelling, the one-pointedness of mind that arises, in detail on up to: this is the mind-predominant concentration. Now, what is present as evil-unwholesome-place dharmas for one of unwise attention becomes the very same wholesome-place dharmas for one of wise attention. When, in him, the [active] co-existences are distanced, but the antidote to co-existence and the concentration-headed dharmas have not yet arisen, [Damaged/Conjectural]: those evil unwholesome dharmas present themselves again. He thinks thus: ‘Am I not experiencing existent evil unwholesome dharmas, or non-existent ones? If non-existent — let me investigate.’ Making investigative mental engagement [mīmāṃsā-manaskāra] predominant, he investigates rightly whether they are abandoned or not. And by frequent dwelling there he touches one-pointedness of mind, by which he becomes free of conceit. ‘From mere obsession my mind is liberated, but not completely from all latent tendencies; and the concentration-headed wholesome dharmas antidotal to those obsessions have been acquired and cultivated, but [the dharmas] antidotal to the latent tendencies have not.’ Thus he knows as it truly is. This is called the investigation-concentration. Making the fourfold concentration predominant, when the obsessions are distanced, for the complete eradication of latent tendencies, for the manifestation of the antidotes to evil unwholesome dharmas and the manifestation of the wholesome dharmas, he generates desire; he exerts himself, and so on — in detail he applies the four right exertions. And thus for him so applied, eight ‘formative impulses for abandonment’ [prahāṇa-saṃskāra] arise, which serve for his eradication of latent tendency and for the fullness of concentration. Namely: [first,] desire — ‘when shall I fulfill concentration and abandon latent tendencies?’ With respect to evil unwholesome dharmas, [second,] exertion, on up to: in cultivation of the antidote one is undistractedly applied; with faith one dwells undistractedly applied — [third,] trust in further attainment, conviction; [fourth,] tranquillity — the gladness and joy that, headed by faith-and-heedfulness, gradually tranquillize the encumbrance on the evil-unwholesome side. [Fifth,] mindfulness — of nine modes, the upholder of nine-mode mental abiding [nava-ākārā citta-sthiti] on the calm side. [Sixth,] full awareness [saṃprajanya]: the wisdom that is on the insight side. [Seventh,] of volition, the mental conditioning [cetanā-cittābhisaṃskāra] — for him investigating what is abandoned and what is not, the mental conditioning, favorable to calm-and-insight [śamatha-vipaśyanā], sets up bodily and verbal action. [Eighth,] by equanimity, when moving in past, future, or present evil-unwholesome-place dharmas — [equanimity is] the mind’s reached state of non-defilement. By these two causes he ascertains the abandonment of latent tendencies and knows it — namely, by volition with its object directly present and by equanimity with its object directly present. These eight are the formative impulses for abandonment. And this eightfold yoga of abandonment-formatives is for the eradication of latent tendencies. Namely: desire — and that very thing which is striving, this is energy; faith which is faith; and tranquillity; and mindfulness; and full awareness; volition; and equanimity. Taking this — summing all this up: when the previously stated concentrations of desire [etc.] and these formative impulses for abandonment converge — when latent tendencies are abandoned and concentration is purified — the base of psychic power [ṛddhi-pāda] is so called as that endowed with the desire-concentration formative-of-abandonment. [Likewise] the base of psychic power endowed with energy-, mind-, or investigation-concentration with formative impulses of abandonment is so called.

For what reason is it called ‘base of psychic power’?

Answer: namely, one whose foot is present is able to step forward and back, to stride. Just so, one for whom these dharmas are present, and for whom this concentration is present, complete — he, with mind thus purified, cleansed, free of impediment, free of secondary defilement, made straight, made workable, established, having attained imperturbability, is able to step forward and back for the attainment and touching of supramundane dharmas. For this is the supreme psychic-power, the supreme prosperity — namely, the supramundane dharmas. Therefore they are called bases of psychic power.

Thus established in concentration and depending on concentration, he exerts himself in the training-in-higher-mind and in the training-in-higher-wisdom [adhicitta- and adhiprajñā-śikṣā]. While he is so exerting himself, with respect to others’ attainment — that of the Teacher and the disciples — the trust, serenity, and faith [śraddhā], in the sense of attainment, is called the faculty of faith [śraddhā-indriya].

And in what does its predominance consist?

Answer: in predominance for the arising of energy, mindfulness, concentration, and wisdom that lead to the arising of supramundane dharma. Those too — energy and so on — are predominant for the arising of supramundane dharma. [Mindfulness has] predominance with respect to the practice. [Concentration has] predominance up to wisdom, for the arising of supramundane dharma. [Wisdom has] predominance [in discernment]. These are the five faculties [pañca-indriya] beginning with faith. When, recognizing the attainment of further distinction by what comes after the previous, by that subsequent trust, serenity, and faith, [he proceeds] toward the attainment of further supramundane dharma — that, in the sense of being uncrushable, is called the power of faith [śraddhā-bala]. By what cannot it be crushed? Noble and unconquerable, that faith cannot be crushed — by a deva, a māra, a brahma, or anyone in the world, even by an obsession of co-dharma defilement; therefore it is called uncrushable. Headed and led by it, those — energy and so on — are also called powers. Endowed with those powers, the mighty one overcomes all the māra’s armies and applies himself to the destruction of the fluxes [āsrava-kṣaya]. Therefore they are called powers [bala]. Now, the faculty of faith and the power of faith are to be seen in the four serenities of clear knowing [avetya-prasāda].

Why so?

Because the serenity of clear knowing of one who has entered the fixed course of rightness [samyaktva-niyāma] has that [faith-faculty/power] as its cause, condition, and source. Therefore, by cause-effect connection, that [serenity] is its predominant-effect — so it is said. ‘There it is to be seen,’ said the Blessed One — not by its own body, not by its own characteristic. The faculty of energy is to be seen in the four right exertions.

Why? Which of those right exertions?

The right exertions which are preparatory for the abandonment of the defilements abandonable by insight [darśana-prahātavya-kleśa] — those right exertions are here intended; for they lead to the abandonment, even unto its absolute end, of evil unwholesome dharmas.

The faculty of mindfulness is to be seen in the four foundations of mindfulness — these four foundations of mindfulness lead to the abandonment of perversions, both general and specific. The faculty of concentration is to be seen in the four dhyānas, the dhyānas which are preparatory for arrival at the way; and the faculty of wisdom is to be seen in the four noble truths — in the truth-knowledge which leads to the realization of the four noble truths. The five faculties are for the attainment of the fruit of asceticism [śrāmaṇya-phala]. Likewise the [five] powers should be understood. From his resort to, cultivation of, and making-much-of those faculties and powers, he produces the wholesome roots conducive to penetration [nirvedha-bhāgīya-kuśala-mūla]. [They are of three grades:] mild, middling, and strong. Namely: warmth [uṣma-gata], summits [mūrdhan], patiences in conformity-with-truth [satya-anulomikī kṣānti], and supreme worldly dharmas [laukikāgra-dharma]. Now, just as some person wishing to make a fire by fire-sticks, needing fire, places the upper stick on the lower fire-stick, makes effort, exerts himself, strives — and thus, making effort, exerting, striving, first warmth is born in the lower stick; that same warmth, increasing, rises upward; increasing further in greater measure, it brings down a flameless fire; and immediately upon the falling of the fire, a flame is born. As by the flame thus born, generated together [with the wood], the fire-mass is made — so by the effort of the rubbing-stick, the resort to the five faculties is to be seen. As in the lower stick first there is warmth, so the warmths [are to be seen]. They are forerunners, becoming signs for the arising of the fire-like fluxless dharmas that burn the defilements. As that warmth rises upward, so the summits are to be seen. As the appearance of smoke, so the truth-conformity patiences are to be seen.

As the falling of a flameless fire, so the supreme worldly dharmas are to be seen. As immediately after, the flame’s arising — so the supramundane, fluxless dharmas are to be seen, which arise immediately after the five faculties subsumed under supreme worldly dharma. Which are they? Answer: the seven awakening-factors [sapta-bodhyaṅga]. For the person who has entered the fixed course of rightness, that awakening — [understanding] things as they truly are — is constituted by these factors. For that as-it-is awakening is taken up by seven factors: three on the calm side, three on the insight side, and one belonging to both. Therefore they are called awakening-factors. [Damaged/Conjectural]: Dharma-discrimination [dharma-pravicaya], energy [vīrya], and joy [prīti] — these three are on the insight side. Tranquillity [praśrabdhi], concentration [samādhi], and equanimity [upekṣā] — these three are on the calm side. Mindfulness [smṛti], belonging to both, is called all-pervading. At that moment, by the first attainment of the awakening-factors, he becomes a trainee [śaikṣa], one progressing [on the path]. His defilements to be abandoned by insight [darśana-prahātavya] are abandoned. Those abandonable by cultivation [bhāvanā-prahātavya] remain. Of these [path factors], his [Damaged/Conjectural: right speech,] right action and right livelihood make up the virtue-aggregate [śīla-skandha]. His right mindfulness and right concentration make up the concentration-aggregate [samādhi-skandha].

For what reason is it called the noble eightfold path?

Answer: for the noble trainee who has seen the step, this is the path, this is the practice, comprised in eight factors.

Without omission, for the abandonment of all defilements and for the realization of liberation — therefore it is called the noble eightfold path. At the time of [attaining] the awakening-factors, realization of reality is acquired; and having acquired it, by that very wisdom one makes a delineation of that realization just as it has been attained — these two, summed up, are called right view. Making that right view predominant, what he wills as the intention of renunciation, the intention of non-malevolence, the intention of non-cruelty — this is called right intention. If his mind moves in applied thoughts [vitarka], he thinks such applied thoughts [accordingly]. If his mind moves to speech, making right view predominant, he speaks the dharma-talk born of that wholesome intention. That becomes for him right speech. If he needs robes, alms-food, lodging, medicine, [or other] requisites, he undertakes their seeking. That seeking, and the returning, in which he dwells with full awareness — in looking out and looking around, in bending and stretching, in wearing the saṅghāṭi and robes, and carrying the bowl; in eating, drinking, chewing, tasting; or, having gone to the dwelling, [in handling] the sought robes etc., in going, standing, sitting, up to the dispelling of sleep-fatigue — he dwells with full awareness. This for him is called right action. He seeks robes [and] up to medicine and requisites by means of the dharma. [Damaged]: Up to being free of the dharma of wrong livelihood — that for him is right livelihood. The right actions and livelihoods subsumed under the abstinences [virati], right action and livelihood — these have been obtained along with the awakening-factors by virtue of the prior attainment of mental engagement. And [they are] called ‘virtues in conformity with what is loved’ [āpakānta-śīla]. For what reason? For a long time those virtues had been esteemed, dear, beloved, and agreeable to the noble ones, the rightly-gone: ‘would that I might attain the restraint of non-doing of misconduct of speech, body, and wrong livelihood — the restraint.’ What had long been for him desired, dear, beloved, agreeable — that is now attained by him at that moment. Therefore they are called ‘in conformity with what is loved’ [āpakānta]. For when he has attained the virtues in conformity with what is loved, he does not knowingly speak false speech, does not deprive a sentient being of life, does not take what is not given, does not engage in wrong conduct in sense-pleasures, and does not seek robes and so on by non-dharma. Thus, making those virtues-in-conformity-with-what-is-loved predominant while cultivating the path, the bodily action and the livelihood — these too are called right speech, action, and livelihood. His right view and right intention, based on speech, action, and livelihood — when he applies cultivating effort, whatever desire, vigor, effort, leaving-behind, advance, stamina, undertaking, mental gripping, and continuity — this is called [Damaged/Conjectural]: right effort. Making the four foundations of mindfulness predominant — the mindfulness subsumed under non-perversion — the nine-mode dwelling-task is again twofold: calm [śamatha] and insight [vipaśyanā]. Right view, right intention, and right effort are insight. Right mindfulness and right concentration are calm. Thus, depending on the purified right speech, action, and livelihood, he cultivates calm and insight. From time to time he realizes the complete abandonment of all fetters and attains the supreme fruit, arhatship. The initial [path] and the cultivation-path [bhāvanā-mārga] abandon defilements by long-time practice. The insight-path [darśana-mārga] abandons defilements by mere knowledge-of-the-bound-thing, by mere arising of knowledge. For this reason, [right] speech, action, and livelihood are established [as belonging] in the cultivation-path. Thus, this sequence of practice — familiarization with the thirty-seven dharmas favorable to awakening [saptatriṃśat-bodhipakṣya-dharma] — is called the cultivation of awakening-factors.

Now, what is the fruit of cultivation?

Answer: the four fruits of asceticism — the fruit of stream-entry, the fruit of once-returning, the fruit of non-returning, and the supreme fruit, arhatship.

What is asceticism [śrāmaṇya]?

What is its fruit?

Answer: asceticism is the path; the abandonment of defilements is the fruit. Moreover, the path arisen later, after the previously arisen path, is the fruit — middle or excellent.

For what reason are four [fruits] established?

Answer: by way of antidote to the abandonment of four kinds of defilements. Namely: from the abandonment of the baseless defilements [nirvastuka-kleśa] that cause going to the lower realms, and from the arising of antidote, the fruit of stream-entry is established — [that is,] it is established from the abandonment of the three fetters [saṃyojana-traya]. The Blessed One [taught] the three fetters as obstacles to the arising of the path in three positions — [that of the] householder, [that of the] ill-stated dharma-vinaya, and [that of the] well-stated dharma-vinaya — and [their abandonment is] for the abandonment of the three fetters. In the householder, [the fetter is] identity-view [satkāya-dṛṣṭi], by which from the very start he does not engage in the path — terror-bringing identity-view. In the ill-stated dharma-vinaya, [the fetter is] clinging-to-virtue-and-vow [śīla-vrata-parāmarśa]. Even one who has set out, it makes him practice wrongly, by which the noble path does not arise. In the well-stated dharma-vinaya, he is unsettled by doubt [vicikitsā]. And he is not practicing wrongly, but, even when training, as long as he has no realization of as-it-is — in the knowable, the doubts and indecisions are obstructive to the arising of the path. Thus the delineation of the fruit of stream-entry.

For this stream-enterer, at most seven existences remain. And this is the continuity of his birth. When he abandons the defilements that bind to birth — those subsumed under deva-existence and human-existence — by the abandonment of which he produces only one further deva-existence and one human-existence, at that moment the fruit of once-returning [sakṛd-āgāmin] is established. When, however, he produces only a deva-existence, having abandoned the defilement that brings to a return-birth here — at that moment the fruit of non-returning [anāgāmin] is established.

From the abandonment of all the defilements conducive to existence and rebirth, the supreme fruit, arhatship, is established. Moreover, the fruit of once-returning is established by the Blessed One [as the path-stage marked] by the abandonment of the three fetters together with the diminution of lust, hatred, and delusion. It is established because of their diminution. From the abandonment of the five lower fetters [pañca-avara-bhāgīya-saṃyojana], the fruit of non-returning. From the complete abandonment of all defilements, the fruit of arhatship — this is called the fruit of cultivation. Now, in those persons of lust-, hatred-, delusion-, conceit-, or applied-thought conduct, the conduct should first be purified by means of a conduct-purifying object. Afterwards they attain mental abiding. For them, that object is fixed; they must necessarily apply themselves to that object. But for one of even-balanced conduct [sama-bhāga-carita], wherever there is delight, with that he should apply himself, simply for mental abiding, not for conduct-purification. As with the even-balanced, so with the one of slight dust [manda-rajaska] is to be understood. Their distinction is this: one of lust-conduct etc., applying himself, becomes one who attains [mental abiding] only after a long time; the even-balanced, not in too long a time; the manda-rajaska, however, swiftly, very swiftly attains mental abiding. The marks of persons of lust-conduct etc. were stated before.

What are the marks of the person of even-balanced conduct and of the manda-rajaska?

Answer: in the person of even-balanced conduct, all those marks are present which belong to persons of lust-conduct etc., but the lust and so on are not predominant, not pre-eminent. Thus, when persons of [merely] even-balanced lust-conduct etc. encounter conditions, their lust and so on are not manifest. Now, the marks of the manda-rajaska (one of slight dust): he is uncovered [by hindrances] and possessed of requisites that are originally pure. He is full of serenity, intelligent, of merit, and endowed with virtues. There are three coverings [āvaraṇa]: covering of action [karma-āvaraṇa], covering of defilement [kleśa-āvaraṇa], and covering of result [vipāka-āvaraṇa]. The covering of action consists in the five actions of immediate retribution [ānantarya], and whatever other action is intentional, heavy, of ripened result, and constraint-causing for the arising of the path. The covering of defilement consists in intense-defilement-state and long-defilement-state, which in the seen-dharma cannot be purified by conduct-purifying or object-purifying. The covering of result consists in the non-functioning of the noble path and absence of serenity in a realm of rebirth. There he matures a result, Or [it occurs] where the noble path can function, Born and present there, he becomes deaf-mute, hand-impaired, incapable of understanding the meaning of dharmas well- or ill-cultivated. Now, [the manda-rajaska is marked by] original-purity, virtue thoroughly pure, and upright view. Virtue thoroughly pure is to be understood by ten causes. Uprightness of view [dṛṣṭi-ṛjutā] is born from faith, through conjunction with conviction [adhimukti]. Because it is conjoined with conviction, guilelessness, well-considered Dharma-meaning, freedom from doubt and indecision, and practice that leads out, the view conjoined with faith is not carried away from this Dharma-Vinaya; it is conjoined with conviction in the Buddhas and the Buddha-disciples. He resolves upon impermanence, upon the impermanent realms of rebirth, upon the deep teaching, and upon the undeclared matters. He is not alarmed, does not fall into alarm. Free of guile and pretense, the view by which he becomes straight, of straight nature, he practices as instructed. He makes himself known as he really is. Of the dharmas — beginning from impermanence, suffering, emptiness, selflessness — the meaning is well-considered, well-weighed, well-examined; by which cause he is without doubt, without indecision. Going by both paths [śamatha and vipaśyanā], he attains further distinction. Thus this four-mode view as taught is called the straightness of view. The equipped-with-requisites, the requisite-collection — in detail — was previously taught in brief. Again, it is fourfold: merit-requisite, knowledge-requisite, prior, and pertaining to the present. The merit-requisite is that by which conforming requisites manifest, auspicious. And he gains good friends. And he becomes without obstacle when applied. The knowledge-requisite is that by which he becomes intelligent, capable of understanding the meaning of dharmas well- or ill-stated. He becomes a recipient of conforming dharma-teaching, meaning-teaching, and admonition. The prior [requisite] is that by which now the faculties become mature, by accumulation of prior wholesome roots. The present-pertaining [requisite] is, namely, wholesome dharma-desire. Thus, for one whose faculties are matured, the restraint of virtue and the restraint of the senses [follow], in detail as before. Now, fullness of serenity: he does not doubt the Teacher, does not waver. He is at peace, resolved. As toward the Teacher, so toward the dharma and the training, in detail as before. Intelligence is that by which he quickly grasps a dharma, does not take a long time to unfold Dharma or its meaning, but swiftly penetrates dharma and its meaning. Merit-doing is that by which he becomes handsome, well-favored to see, pleasant, long-lived, of acceptable speech, of great fame, known, of great merit, recipient of robes etc., honored and revered by kings and others. ‘Endowed with virtues’ — the virtues to be understood are few-desires [alpa-icchatā] and so on. As said in the ‘Ornament of a Recluse’ [Śramaṇa-alaṃkāra], with these he is naturally endowed. Such are the marks of the person of manda-rajaska to be understood.

[Now,] six person-designations: namely, recluse [śramaṇa], brāhmaṇa, brahma-farer [brahmacārin], monk [bhikṣu], ascetic [yati], and renunciant [pravrajita]. Of recluses, four: victor over the path [mārga-jina], teacher of the path [mārga-deśika], one who lives by the path [mārga-jīvin], and defiler of the path [mārga-dūṣin]. The well-gone one [sugata] is the victor over the path. He who is a Dharma-speaker is the teacher of the path. He who has entered upon practice lives by the path. He who has entered upon wrong practice is the defiler of the path. Sugata is so called as one who has attained the destruction of lust, hatred, [and] delusion without remainder. Dharma-speaker: one who teaches the Dharma for the subduing of lust, hatred, and delusion. The rightly-practicing one: one who has entered upon practice for the subduing of lust, hatred, and delusion. [Wrongly-practiced:] of evil virtue, evil dharma, wrongly practiced. Moreover, trainees and non-trainees [i.e., the noble persons] are called victors over the path by [virtue of their] conquest of defilements abandonable by insight and cultivation; [and] there [also] the Tathāgata, [as well as] the bodhisattva practiced for awakening in the future [are so called]. And disciples — sūtra-bearers, vinaya-bearers, mātṛkā-bearers, who hold the conventional Dharma-Vinaya, who set Dharma-guidance in motion — these are called teachers of the path. [Damaged/Conjectural]: Now, [as for] the good worldlings who have entered upon practice for their own benefit — [those who live by the path] — scrupulous, desiring training, applied for the attainment of the not-yet-attained, for the realization of the not-realized, for the direct touching of the not-yet-touched; fit and capable, [and so on] up through [their being capable of] the realization of the not-yet-realized. These are called those who live by the path. In them there is warmth for the arising of this noble wisdom-faculty; they are not dead, but are said to be alive [as practitioners]. Therefore they are called those who live by the path. Now, that person who is of evil virtue, evil dharma, [and so on] up through [the formula] ‘non-celibate, claiming to be celibate,’ he is called defiler of the path — by him the path is defiled from the root, from the beginning, by which he becomes unfit, incapable, a non-vessel for the arising of the path, even though the teaching of the path exists, even though the [possibility of] realization exists. Therefore he is called defiler of the path. And this was said by the Blessed One with this intent: ‘Here, what is the recluse? Here [there are recluses] as far as the fourth [stage of fruit, i.e., arhatship]; empty are the other doctrines, [devoid] of [true] recluses and brāhmaṇas. Where the noble eightfold path is known, there is the first recluse, [and] there [are recluses] as far as the fourth.’

[Now,] of brāhmaṇas, three: namely, brāhmaṇa by birth [jāti], brāhmaṇa by designation [saṁjñā], and brāhmaṇa by practice [pratipatti]. Now, the jātibrāhmaṇa (brāhmaṇa by birth): this one who is a jātibrāhmaṇa — family-born, womb-born, mother-arisen, [duly] produced from mother and from father. Now, the saṁjñābrāhmaṇa (brāhmaṇa by designation) — in the world this becomes [his] name: notion, designation, convention, usage. [Now,] the pratipattibrāhmaṇa (brāhmaṇa by [right] engagement). Brāhmaṇa by practice: the one whose task is done, by whom the evil unwholesome dharmas have been removed. As was said: ‘There is no [further] task for the brāhmaṇa; the brāhmaṇa is one whose task is done.’ [Now,] of brahma-farers, three: namely, the abstinence-undertaker, the in-between-abandoner [antara-prahāyin], [and] the absolute abandoner [atyanta-prahāyin]. The abstinence-undertaker: one who is [now] restrained from the non-celibate dharma, having [originally] undertaken the training. The in-between-abandoner: one who is free of lust by the worldly path, [but still] a worldling. The absolute abandoner: namely, the non-returner, or again, the arhat.

[Now,] of monks, five: [1] ‘he begs, therefore he is a monk’ [bhikṣ → bhikṣu, by etymology]; [2] monk by self-claim; [3] monk by designation; [4] monk because his defilements are broken [bhinna-kleśo bhikṣuḥ]; [5] monk ordained by the fourth-formal-motion procedure [jñapti-caturtha-karman].

[Now,] of ascetics, three: [1] ascetic by restraint from evil conduct — the one restrained from unwholesome bodily and verbal action; [2] ascetic by restraint of [the] senses — the one with guarded sense-doors, of guarded mindfulness, [with] alert mindfulness, [as elaborated] above; [3] ascetic by restraint of defilements — the one for whom the defilements to be abandoned by insight are abandoned, and [as for] each arisen applied thought — malevolent applied thought and harmful applied thought; covetousness, malevolence, wrong view, false view, anger, resentment, concealment, spite, and the like — states leading to lower realms, hellish, going to bad destinations, making one a non-recluse — as they arise, he does not allow [them], [but] abandons [them], purifies [the mind of them], puts an end to [them]. This is twofold restraint of defilements: restraint of obsession [paryavasthāna] and restraint of both [obsession and latent tendency, anuśaya].

[Now,] of renunciants, two: [those in the] well-stated Dharma-Vinaya and [those in the] ill-stated Dharma-Vinaya. [Those in] the well-stated Dharma-Vinaya: monk, nun, probationer, male novice, female novice. Moreover, he [is one who] renounces from himself the evil unwholesome dharmas — [such a one] is called renunciant in the ultimate sense. [Those in the] ill-stated Dharma-Vinaya: namely the tīrthika, the wanderer [parivrājaka], the Jain, the white-clad wandering ascetic, or another such kind. [Damaged]: Thus [the six designations] — recluse, brāhmaṇa, brahma-farer, monk, ascetic, renunciant — [are to be understood] … and so on. Time-distinction: long-time-cultivated path, and not-long-time-cultivated path.

These four distinctions — what are their bases?

[Damaged]: Or wise … wise in means, skilful — that is the meaning. Application on the side of continuity, continuous, alert — so it is called. [Damaged]: Long-time-cultivated cultivation … through the threefold distinction. By way of yoga-application-time-distinction, the establishment of persons: the person of unripe faculties, even if skilled in means and continuous and experienced, does not succeed in the wholesome dharma fit for meditation. [Damaged]: There, of ripe faculties and …, knower of means. He becomes of ripe faculties, knower of means, but not of quick knowledge. There, ripe faculties, knower of means, not continuous, not experienced — he is not one whose own benefit is accomplished, task-done. And who is of ripe faculties, knower of means, continuous, experienced — he is one who succeeds. He is of quick knowledge. And he has accomplished his own task; he is task-done.

Now, the four māras and the many māra-actions are to be understood by the yogin engaged in yoga, and, having been fully known, they should be avoided. The four māras: namely, the aggregate-māra [skandha-māra], the defilement-māra [kleśa-māra], the death-māra [maraṇa-māra], and the deva-son-māra [devaputra-māra]. The five aggregates of clinging are the aggregate-māra. The defilements pertaining to the three realms are the defilement-māra. — those of this-and-that beings. From this-and-this group of beings, whatever first-of-all death — the time-event — is death-māra. And the deva-son, born in the realm of desire, who [opposes] one engaged in transcending the aggregates, defilements, and death by the side of unwholesomeness — having attained resolve, brings about obstacles. [who] creates distraction, this is the deva-son-māra. [As for death-māra:] where one dies, and that death itself, and that by which he yields to death — [namely,] by an obstructive [aggregate-]object that brings [him to] death — by reference to this, the four māras are established. [That is,] when the five aggregates of clinging, born and grown, perish, having generated defilements, [the new aggregates,] born in the future, perish [as well]; [the] falling, [the] falling-away of beings, cessation of the life-faculty, passing of time — own-nature itself is [what we call] death. And the deva-son-māra creates obstacle for one applied to the surmounting of death, by which he is unable to surmount the death-nature, or only surmounts it after a long time. Now, the worldling free of lust by the worldly path comes under the māra’s sway, whether remaining here or reborn there, [he is] under [Māra's] sway; so too, again, is one [still] not free of lust [in the supramundane sense]. [Of these,] the one [worldly-]free of lust is like one in [māra’s] hand, to be dealt with as he wishes. Or again, the one free of lust [by worldly path alone] is bound by māra’s bondage, not released from māra’s snares, since he must [eventually] return to this realm [of desire]. Now, māra-actions: whoever generates a wholesome desire connected with renunciation [and then,] making lust-greed predominant, proceeds [back in saṁsāra] — this is to be known as a māra-action. For one dwelling with guarded sense-doors, whose mind, in lust-arousing forms, sounds, smells, tastes, tangibles, dharmas, in sign-seizing and feature-seizing, leaps forth — this is to be known as māra-action. Likewise for one dwelling with knowledge of right measure in food, whose mind leaps forth in delight-and-lust toward exquisite tastes; or toward irregularity in eating. Likewise for one dwelling applied to wakefulness in the early and late night, whose mind leaps forth to sleeping-pleasure, lying-down-pleasure, side-lying-pleasure — this is to be known as māra-action. Likewise for one dwelling with full awareness, in setting forth and returning etc., seeing a youthful, beautiful-complexioned, lust-arousing woman, with mind unwisely seizing the sign, leaping forth; or seeing varied worldly spectacles, mind leaps forth; in much-business, much-task, mind leaps forth — namely in delight in mixing with householders and renunciants, in being of one resolve with evil friends, in approving [their] view, mind leaps forth. This is to be known as māra-action.

Likewise toward the Buddha, dharma, saṅgha, suffering, origin, cessation, path, in this world, in the next world, doubts and indecisions arise — this is to be known as māra-action. Gone to the forest, or to the foot of a tree, or to an empty hut, he sees a great alarming fearsomeness, terror-causing, hair-raising. In the guise of a brāhmaṇa, or of a human, or of a non-human, someone approaches, and unwisely, from the bright side severs, and incites him into the dark side. This is to be known as māra-action. When the mind leaps forth toward gain and honor, to stinginess, great-desire, discontent, anger, grudge, deceit, cajoling talk, etc., to dharmas counter to the ornament of a recluse — mind leaps forth. This is to be known as māra-action. Such are the kinds of māra-actions to be understood — those of the four māras as appropriate.

Now, [Damaged/Conjectural: by three] causes the undertaking of one rightly applied becomes fruitless: namely, [non-]perfecting of faculties, [non-]conforming instruction, and weakness of concentration. [1] If the faculties are not perfected, though the instruction is conforming and the concentration is [Damaged/Conjectural: strong], thus his undertaking is fruitless. [2] If the faculties are not perfected, and the instruction is not conforming, though the concentration is strong — thus the undertaking is fruitless. [3] If the faculties are perfected, and the instruction is conforming, but the concentration is weak — thus the undertaking is fruitless. [Likewise: if the faculties are perfected, and the instruction is conforming, but the concentration is weak — thus the undertaking is fruitless.] [Whereas:] if the faculties are perfected, and the instruction is conforming, and the concentration is strong — thus the undertaking is fruitful. By [absence of] these three causes one is fruitless; by [presence of] those same three causes, [one is] fruitful.

Summary verse: Persons, their delineation, and again by object, instruction and training, [and] likewise dharmas conducive to training; loss of yoga, yoga, mental engagement, what is wisely done, the task, cultivation, fruit, [and] the person-designations; māra and māra-actions, [and] the fruitful and fruitless undertaking.

In the Yogācārabhūmi, comprised in the Śrāvakabhūmi, the second Yogasthāna [is complete].